in prison, in person

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘Revolution in Prison. Senator Antonio Trillanes in jail & in denial’

July 23, 2003: Some 321 armed soldiers led by Army Captain Gerardo Gambala and Navy Lt Antonio Trillanes took over the Oakwood apartment tower at the Ayala Center in the City of Makati and demanded that Philippine President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo resign (‘Oakwood mutiny,’ Wikipedia). Knock on wood.

***

August 5, 2006: Since then, ‘Oakwood’ has become synonymous with ‘mutiny’ (Alexander Martin Remollino, bulatlat.com). So, the story of the Oakwood Mutiny tells me that dissent will get you history and put you on the pages of Roget’s Thesaurus – not to mention put you high up there in the clouds and give you a magnificent view of the landscape. Landscape, if you’re using your eyes only, on top of the tower. Mindscape, if instead you’re using your head, even inside prison.

***

March 07, 2008: ‘In denial: Trillanes refuses to participate further in mutiny trial’ (Michael Punongbayan, newsflash.org). March 13, 2008: ‘Magdalo soldiers want Arroyo, et al to testify’ (Julie M Aurelio, inquirer.net). Knowing him as a Magdalo leader who believes in the moral bankruptcy of GMA, I’m surprised still-in-prison-for-rebellion and-now-Senator Antonio Trillanes doesn’t want to participate, but he wants GMA to participate. What’s this, ‘Ladies first?’ That tells me that dissent will get you ungentlemanly conduct and dreadful logic.

***

I know of two ways of using your head: being logical (critical thinking), and being inspired (creative thinking). Trillanes is stuck one way or the other. He forgot that iron bars do not a prison make? That tells me the Magdalos need more practice using their heads, not only their mouths.

***

April 02, 2008: ‘Nine Magdalo soldiers plead guilty to coup d’etat charges’ (gmanews.tv). That tells me that some Magdalos have had good practice using their heads both ways. We should all do that. Full thinking is a good exercise of the brain cells. That tells me those in the opposition to GMA like Senator Alan Peter Cayetano and Representative Joe de Venecia don’t know a good exercise when they see one.

***

(1) The brave, historical Magdalos betrayed the Philippine Revolution – according to their rivals, the Magdiwangs. They had their President Andres Bonifacio executed, after charging and trying him for treason (Philip Bowring, June 12, 1998, iht.com). Either way, a record that leaves much to be desired, doesn’t it?

***

This is what happened. During the Tejeros Convention of March 1897, the delegates elected Emilio Aguinaldo President and Andres Bonifacio Director of the Interior, a slap on the face and a kick in the ass. Bonifacio withdrew from the convention and formed his own government, and fighting broke out between the Aguinaldo and Bonifacio troops. Bonifacio was arrested (countrystudies.us). And the rest is history. Revolutions devour their own children.

***

In parallel, the changing of the pleas of the nine Magdalos constituted a betrayal of the Oakwood Mutiny – the nine had had a change of heart; in late 2004, they had apologized to GMA for their participation in the Oakwood Mutiny. Ouch. Asst Chief State Prosecutor Richard Anthony Fadullon said, ‘Trillanes and his group are still in denial that the coup d’etat did happen … He is not man enough to face the consequences of his action’ (DJ Yap, April 03, inquirer.net). Double ouch.

***

The Magdalos declared us Filipinos independent of the Spaniards, but not of the Americans. From the frying pan into the fire. Some leaders think they know better than the others; remember the prophetic words of Manuel Luis Quezon? ‘I prefer a government run like Hell by Filipinos rather than run like Heaven by Americans!’ Any which way, Hell is assured if you betray the people; Heaven is assured if you don’t.

***

(3) The brave, historical Magdalos lost the war – the Revolution. When the Magdalos realized that they had been betrayed by the Americans with the help of some Filipinos, it was too late. Capitulation devours her own children too.

***

Duh. They who forget the past are bound to repeat it. The modern-day Magdalos had not learned from their historical forebears. The Magdalos of our time continue to think Independence, not Unity; they continue to think Revolution, unfortunately of the insane kind. An anagram of Magdalo is this: Mad goal.

***

The image displayed above is my Photoshop CS3 mosaic of the Magdalo flag of 1897 worn as armband by the Oakwood mutineers of 2003, more than 100 years after that flag had failed to unite the Filipinos in the struggle against a common enemy. My mosaic is my message that the modern Magdalos are all thinking pieces, not thinking patterns. They continue to think like surgeons: Cut off the diseased parts, and that will solve the problem. They do not search for the cause of the disease to cure it. They are elitist, not holistic in their thinking. They continue to think that some parts are greater than the whole.

***

True revolutions are not waged with smart swords or smart bombs or smart helicopters; true revolutions are waged with smart words and smart brains and smart hearts. Mahatma Gandhi was a true revolutionary that Lee Kwan Yew could not be; Jose Rizal was a true revolutionary that Andres Bonifacio did not wish to be; John Paul II was a true revolutionary that George W Bush is hard put to be. Peace is the only way to the true Revolution.

***

Was Henry David Thoreau a true revolutionary? He was. Is Trillanes a true revolutionary in the image of Thoreau? He would be. Trillanes has quoted Thoreau saying, ‘Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison’ (gmanews.tv).

***

Senator Trillanes, you are inspired to cite Thoreau there, but being in prison is the least of my worries about you. I’m worried that you have not shown any vision of the Philippines that we would all love to have, only a vision of the Philippines without GMA. And if you had that vision of a greater Philippines, pray tell us what sacrifices would we have to make to get to the Promised Land? What would be the guarantee that when GMA is out ASAP, the new leaders will lead us to Paradise ASAP and not to Perdition ASAP?

***

I’m worried because you insist on a change of the highest government official, but I know that a change of the head is not a true Revolution, only a revolution of the presidential chair. ‘Give me a chair to stand and I will move the Earth.’ Archimedes couldn’t, George W Bush can’t do it.

***

The Magdalos and Joseph Estrada and even some clergy led by Archbishop Oscar Cruz accuse the GMA administration of being morally bankrupt. Aren’t we all? Logic tells us that if the Filipinos are massively bankrupt in their ethics unlike any other nation, then that is a gargantuan historical failure of none other than the Roman Catholic Church. Don’t blame me, a Roman Catholic, for telling you.

***

But all that is by way of the critical thinker. I’d rather be a creative thinker. A true Revolution is personal. It begins and ends with a person. And folks, the right-thinking Magdalos have shown us a good example.

***

November 29, 2007: Walking out of his court hearing on the Oakwood Mutiny, Senator Trillanes declared a revolt at the Manila Peninsula Hotel (see my ‘Manila Rain-Walk. The day Senator Trillanes called a 5-Star Revolt, Peter Parcel drank coffee & the bride danced,’ November 30, frankahilario.com). Among other people, the revolt invited soldiers in an armored personnel carrier that crashed into the lobby and soldiers spraying tear gas and automatic fire. The revolt lasted 6 hours.

***

March 07, 2008: In prison, Trillanes decided not to attend the hearing of the coup d’etat case against the Magdalos and to forgo his testimony in the defense of his group, ‘after much reflection,’ he wrote, claiming in a letter that it is because the trial has become a ‘travesty of justice’ (Michael Punongbayan, newsflash.org). That is also volition, and you can’t take that away from Trillanes. Trillanes insists on his own kind of Revolution.

And so do I. The Philippines needs a Revolution, and that Revolution starts with you. With me. It is a product of our own volition.

***

We can learn from Army Chief Yano who said after the nine Magdalos changed their minds and instead pleaded guilty:

It is more of putting an end or closure to their case so that they can move on with their lives and be with their families again and see their kids grow up and hope that with the available legal remedies they can still experience how to be a civilian or soldier again in the near future.

‘So that we can move on with our lives’ – is that too much to ask of Your Revolution, Senator Trillanes?

Revolution in prison? No. Revolution in person? Yes. I should say, the Revolution starts with the leader, the one who says we need a Revolution. A change in the head would be a good beginning.

Crucifixion of Oscar Cruz

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘‘Public Sinners’ As Communion Of Church & State’

March 30, Sunday, Manila time. It’s the week after Holy Week and I understand some well-meaning Filipinos want to crucify Lingayen-Dagupan (Pangasinan) Archbishop Oscar Cruz for condemning our President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA). Both are Catholics, one the former President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP), the other the current President of the Philippines. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Two heads at loggerheads are no better.

***

Where else in the world but in the Philippines where you can witness real-life crucifixions? As a Filipino, I’m not surprised. In another sense, those who would be crucified invite it upon themselves. It’s the tongue. ‘From the same mouth come both blessing and cursing’ (James 3: 10, New American Bible).

I wouldn’t want to be the one crucified, so I wouldn’t want to nail anyone on the cross, even verbally. I couldn’t even entertain the thought of watching Mel Gibson’s The Passion of Christ, although I’ve heard and read that it’s great. But I’m a writer, so I write. I’m safe as long as I watch my speech.

***

In the time of Jesus Christ, before the court of Pontius Pilate, the priests were inciting the people, who then demanded, ‘Crucify him! Crucify him!’ (Luke 23: 21, New American Bible). It was the priests who were inciting the people to betray Christ. Christ is The High Priest. Today, it is the people demanding that a high priest be crucified. Tongues and times haven’t changed much.

***

They could not have chosen a more perfect target for crucifixion: Lingayen-Dagupan (Pangasinan) Archbishop and former CBCP head Oscar Cruz. In fact, ‘Cruz’ means ‘cross’ in Spanish, the language of the Spaniards. (You know a cross, of course, the one they nail you on alive if you were bad, or thought to be bad, and leave you there to perish in your own time. At other times, they would burn you at the stake. A choice between the devil and the deep blue sea.) I remember, the Spanish friars were historically the first to crucify the Filipinos. History repeats itself even to those who remember. Now we’re making history ourselves – we’re crucifying our own kind.

***

In fact, it is Archbishop Cruz who has been calling for the President to be crucified. This Catholic priest has been doing that publicly since I can remember. Would you believe 2004? And Oscar Cruz has been careless with his idiom as Jesus Christ has been careful with his metaphor. Why do you associate with public sinners? the people asked Christ in reproach. Because it is the sick who needs a doctor, Jesus said. That’s a parable. I would not associate with public sinners, Oscar Cruz said. I would deny them, including GMA and her family, the sacrament of Holy Communion. That’s not a parable. Then he denied that he would deny them. (I forgive everyone in the Black & White Movement for not associating with public sinners, for none of them is Christ.)

***

Whether you’re a Catholic or not, I want to tell you that when I go to Mass – and that happens about 3 times a year – I am almost always the one left on the pew when almost everyone stands up to receive the Holy Eucharist. I’m not ashamed; I don’t fidget in my seat. Why? Because I know two things. One is that you need to confess and be sorry for your sins, that is, to receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation (that is, Confession and Penance), before you can receive the Body of Christ in the sacrament of Holy Communion. Two is that I confess here and now that I had not gone to confession before.

***

To me, you are a public sinner if you receive Holy Communion in the public eye of the Church (the people) but you have not confessed your sins to a priest. So, if Archbishop Oscar Cruz would not associate with public sinners, he would have a problem – in one Catholic church alone in a single celebration of the Mass, there are too many of them to avoid!

***

Norman Bordadora reports that Archbishop Oscar Cruz said he would not give Holy Communion to ‘public sinners’ when asked if he would give the sacrament to GMA or members of her family (‘Lawmakers want prelate punished,’ March 30, inquirer.net). He said what he said. Having said that, the Archbishop made the Southern Tagalog alliance in the House composed of 28 congressmen very angry. Quezon Representative Danilo Suarez, their leader, said the alliance had asked the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) to censure Oscar Cruz, one of them. Would they?

***

If it is true that the priest would not deny the public sinner the blessings of Holy Communion, that would deny the credibility of the media who reported the incident. It’s not that I believe in Oscar Cruz less but I believe in the media more. So, shouldn’t we the people instead be reproving Oscar Cruz and be shouting, ‘Crucify him! Crucify him!’

***

Still: Should a priest be in the first place in the political arena slugging it out with the politicians? Isn’t there a separation of Church and State?

No, Archbishop Cruz would tell you, according to Santosh Digal (February 28, cbcpnews.com):

There are no directives from the Vatican telling Filipino Catholic bishops to keep out of the country’s politics … In fact, the opposite is true, says Dagupan Archbishop Oscar Cruz. Vatican II document Gaudium et Spes says that the Church should ‘pass moral judgments even on matters relating to politics, whenever the fundamental rights of man or the salvation of souls require it.’

So, Archbishop Cruz is in his proper element, and I agree with him. Except that his language does not agree with me.

***

‘The ethical dimension of a government’ – yes. The virtual dimension of the real. I myself do not believe on the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. What would be your moral basis without a moral basis? When Archbishop Cruz uses the term ‘public sinners,’ inadvertently, he is using the language that connects the physical with the metaphysical world. ‘Public sinners’ is a concept that is by itself a good example of the concept that you cannot separate the Church from the State.

***

‘Public’ refers to the people, and there is no government without the people, so the people are in fact the Government, the State. What is the physical proof of that? We Filipinos have two historical proofs of that. On February 25, 1986, People Power I (also called the EDSA Revolution) occurred, the people changing their national leader by ousting Ferdinand Marcos. That is a mighty exercise of Government, the only exercise that matters. On January 20, 2001, People Power II occurred, the people changing their national leader by ousting Joseph Estrada. That is another mighty exercise of the power of the State, who is none but the People. (When the Filipinos are good, they show the world. Now, some people have been trying another mighty exercise of People Power, this time against GMA, but the people are not with them. Sorry about that.)

***

‘Sin’ is not a human invention like a ‘lie’ is a human invention. ‘Sin’ belongs to the spiritual world as a ‘lie’ belongs to the material world. And yet you cannot separate the two.

Wikipedia says Oscar Cruz is ‘a vocal critic of the Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo administration.’ Bishop, you can disagree without being disagreeable. As a Christian, you can be a vocal critic of the Sin, but never of the Sinner. You have to distinguish the act from the actor. Otherwise, God would not have forgiven Paul of Tarsus because he didn’t know what he was doing! ‘I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate to do’ (Romans 7: 15, New International Version).

***

Archbishop Oscar Cruz knows about media and language. He has published a great many books, including Media In Our Midst and Call Of The Laity (cbcponline.net). He has his own website, ‘Viewpoints,’ http://ovc.blogspot.com, which he started in December of 2004.

As a Roman Catholic, this is what I believe about media: It is not right to separate the Church from the State. It is only right to separate princely language from unpriestly language. What is the message I’m trying to put across? The crucifixion by language that is a cross.

think new mantra

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘PS,’

‘PS comma’ is how to read my little title; it’s a mantra born in my mind just this morning, March 24, Manila time. It is a new mantra for creative thinking; reminiscent of Edward de Bono’s ‘Po’ (no comma), I’m offering it as a mind-blogging phrase for you to mine your gray matter and come out with copious ideas. The service is free – it comes from you; you help yourself.

***

Contrary to grammatical rules, my comma is not meant to indicate a pause, a temporary stop; instead, my comma is meant to be a prompt, to indicate a request to finish a silent ‘and?’ and a silent ‘so?’ and a silent ‘however?’ and a silent ‘nonetheless?’ and a silent ‘nevertheless?’ and a silent ‘but?’ and a silent ‘for?’ and a silent ‘nor?’ and a silent ‘yet?’ and a silent ‘or?’ Silence means ‘Yes?’

***

If nothing else, ‘PS,’ reminds you to relax, to be not serious. I’m not serious when I’m brainstorming, and that’s exactly why I’m creative! No Writer’s Block whatsoever.

***

Of course, my ‘PS,’ comes from ‘PS, I love you’ – which I have explained earlier in ‘A Thinker’s Faith. Rebel Thinker Writes, ‘PS, I Love You’ (frankahilario.com) – where I first presented ‘PS’ as a mantra for creative thinking. If you have ever written a letter, you already know that ‘PS’ means postscript, that which is done after writing, something you remembered to say after you have written your complimentary close. As I use it here, ‘PS’ means prescript, that which is done before writing. This morning I came up with the comma after ‘PS’ and that I will explain in a little while.

In Hindu and Buddhist practice, a mantra is ‘a sacred word, chant, or sound that is repeated during meditation to facilitate spiritual power and transformation of consciousness’ (Encarta Dictionaries 2007). A mantra is a ‘mental device, instrument of thought’ (iivs.de). Often, a mantra is only 1 or 2 syllables (buddhanet.net), but it can be a series of syllables (well.com). My ‘PS,’ or ‘PS comma’ is 4 syllables, so number is not a problem here.

***

Now, why am I offering ‘PS,’ as mantra? Because I had a flash of insight. Because it’s a very simple way of reaching any level of consciousness in creativity. ‘OM’ as mantra to reach the ‘7 levels of consciousness’ (swamij.com) is too serious for me, but you get the idea. Saying ‘PS comma’ is in fact fooling around with the mind, about which I have already written (‘PC Fools. The Rebel Writer Writes Of Slaves & Masters,’ frankahilario.com). With ‘PS,’ you are in fact trying to seduce yourself into a mental state of creativity, if fleetingly – and that’s all the time you need! Believe me. Been there, done that.

***

‘PS’ – noon today, when I was trying to collect notes on the acronym, I thought of Sony’s PlayStation and, surfing, clicked on Wikipedia. And now, here is a lesson in creative thinking from my Serendipity X and their Wikipedia on the subject of Sony’s PlayStation (PS). The head note on the PlayStation section says (en.wikipedia.org):

The current version of this article or section is written in an informal style and with a personally invested tone. It reads more like a story than an encyclopedia entry.

Very funny. What Wikipedia does not encourage is exactly what I do encourage because that’s how I write: personal, fervent.

***

So, according to the watchdogs of Wikipedia, an encyclopedia entry should be written in a staid, no-feelings-seen-no-bias-shown manner. Boring. That’s why nobody reads the encyclopedia. And yes, I now understand Wikipedia doesn’t want to be read either! That is to say, like all the other encyclopedia makers, they don’t want their sentences to be relaxed; they are not trying to impart knowledge on the reader – they are merely trying to impress him with their erudition.

***

Now, repeat after me, say ‘PS,’ – what I’m trying to do is get you to relax. You can’t be creative if you can’t relax. ‘PS comma’ is a non-threatening, low-cholesterol, high-energy diet that when you get a taste of it in your mouth you’ll want to experience it again and again. It’s a highly consumable non-consumable. This is a case where you can have your cake and eat it too.

***

‘PS comma’ – yes. Don’t underestimate the comma. We are told by the English Language Centre Study Zone of the University of Victoria in British Columbia, Canada: ‘The comma ‘is one of the most important punctuation marks in English’ (web2.uvcs.uvic.ca). Aren’t they all?

***

Look at my strange-looking title again; today, I have come up with a Writer’s Unblock, a radical use of the comma, as the comma in ‘PS,’ is a come-on, an invitation to a dance of the mind, an encouragement to come up with 13 new blades of ideas where none grew before. The comma in ‘PS,’ means, in brief: ‘What else?’ The comma asks you: ‘What else can you see? What else can you not see? What else is there? What else is not there? What else can be done? What else can not be done? What else do people say? What else do people not say? Etcetera.

***

In my previous essay, ‘A Thinker’s Faith’ that I uploaded yesterday, I gave you 30 examples of how to use ‘PS’ as a device for creative thinking, accompanied with a colon – ‘PS:’ An unfortunate incident, I realize that now. As a device for thinking, the colon is not really a come-on to start with but a warning to stop and think more logically, which was not my intention. To begin to think logically is to stop to think creatively.

***

And now let me put to the test my ‘PS,’ mantra, and try to generate as many entry points to begin to write as many creative essays as I can from a bit of unpromising news. ABL Lorenzo reports on the uncertain situation on the supply of rice for us Filipinos (March 24, gmanews.tv):

The government is looking to boost spending on rice to ensure a sufficient supply of the staple, Finance Secretary Margarito B Teves said. ¶ The country’s economic managers, the finance chief said, would be meeting with Agriculture Secretary Arthur C Yap to discuss measures to prevent a rice shortage and keep prices under control.

Applying now my mantra, I can write at least 13 different happy/sad essays (I prefer happy) on the basis of only those 2 sentences I have quoted of the discouraging news.

***

So: With ‘PS,’ as my mantra, I can generate 13 beginnings of 13 essays on the basis of bad news. Watch out when I work that magic spell on some good news!

***

So: Look at the title of this little essay on my own creative mantra again. It suggests an engagement yet to be consummated, doesn’t it? I like my mantra to be like that. What else? Listen to the Beatles sing their greatest song, ‘PS, I love you.’ This one is a standing invitation to a dance. RSVP.

association, word dissociation

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘A Writer’s Faith. Rebel Thinker Writes, ‘PS, I Love You’’

This is Chapter 4 of my book Rebel Thinker Writer’s Guide For Non-Dummies (Chapter 3 is ‘Serendipity X,’ frankahilario.com). This new chapter is about how I can teach you to start writing with a great idea when you have no idea to begin with in the first place!

***

I want the best for you. And how am I going to give you that? Today, I shall give you a mantra, the likes of which you’ve never seen before – and neither have I, since I just invented it today – the magic of which you don’t have to imagine after this. I was creative without the mantra, but now that it’s here, I might as well employ it to enjoy it more myself.

***

A mantra is a word, a chant, an incantation, or a magic spell. So, let me create some atmosphere, as in a circus. I imagine great writing is a great circus act where there is always magic.

***

We’re into science, but since I’m writing about creative writing, we can learn from being creative even from those in the arts. ‘The Artist’s Way’ is the million-dollar technique that Julia Cameron teaches in her book of that same title; Julia’s way to creativity is for you to write in your journal at your ‘best’ time of day, and to be religious about the habit. The book is a million-copy bestseller (artistswayatwork.com). The lesson? Creative writing is yours if you want it.

***

What’s in a name? That which we call blogging by any other name would be journaling. Journaling by itself is getting to be a habit in religion, with Ms Luann Budd, Professor of the San Jose State University in California encouraging the youth to write their own spiritual journals, coming out with her book Journal Keeping: Writing For Spiritual Growth (Karen Anne C Liquete, Manila Bulletin, March 19, 2008, E-1; read more of it here in journalkeeping.org). With Luann, learning to write has just become essentially learning to grow in the Holy Spirit – a most creative way. The lesson? Creative writing is as spiritual as you make it.

***

I like Luann’s metaphor of the RAM (random access memory) for the brain, because if your computer’s RAM fills up, your Windows freezes and you can’t do anything until you stop everything and start all over again – Reboot!

***

I must say, with serendipity, Luann Budd has discovered a new entry point to writing in a manner creative, and that is spirituality, in which traveling the road is re-creative.

***

That book was published in 2002. I just surfed and found in amazon.com that there are other journaling-for-spiritual-growth books out there. This one targets the youth, since Luann has a Youth Ministry for New Life Covenant Church in San Jose, California. I can see that before this decade ends, any number of journaling young readers will come out with their own books that will surprise the world.

***

Me, I’m 68 and anyway I’m too lazy to keep a journal going, even if I can easily type everything on my laptop computer – I’ve been typing for half a century now, starting with my laptop typewriter, and I’m a touch-typist and the fastest I’ve seen. You don’t need the computer to come out with a great idea. (To come out with a great essay? That’s a different story.) I know because I’ve never run out of ideas since high school just a little more than 50 years ago; I know I’m crazily, happily creative – so I’d like to share with you my technique for generating one after another ideas for the beginning of a great article (even if it’s only a tentative title, or theme, or topic, or theory, or assumption, or subject, or focus). That is to say, what I always do is this: To generate ideas, I make one paradigm shift after another.

And how do I do that? The process I’ve already called ‘Serendipity X,’ my fooling around with ideas to come up creative. I play with my mind like my mind plays tricks on me when I’m sleeping: I’m flying, I’m dying, I’m having a wet dream, I’m doing this or that which I do not do when I’m awake – and most of the time I enjoy my dreams. Your mind is creative when you allow it to be. If you have doubts that my Serendipity X works, my creation of the mantra itself should be proof enough.

***

First, let me tell you about Ray Bradbury, who prompts his creative instincts using word association, working with unrelated words that don’t make sense being simply listed one after the other, and then he makes sense of it all by linking the words in a story out of the blue, even out of this world. Like listing the words crocodile blue cause road trick mat shine like that and making up a story going like, ‘It was a blue crocodile that caused a road to sag and a trick to run, that is, to make the mat shine’ – you’re beginning to get a hang of it.

***

Come to think of it, although I have given it neither a name nor described it as a teachable, workable method till now, my creativity technique is the exact opposite of Ray Bradbury’s word association – I shall describe it here as word dissociation, where with a group of related words (ideas for the article), I change perspective and the thought that comes out is (ultimately) sensible but has been neither directly suggested nor made obvious by any of the earlier ideas.

***

Thinking more, writing better, how to make writing about technology a little more creative, popularizing science: I am enthralled and enthused by it all. It is not only the science, not only the sense, but more so that seduction, that attraction, and in the proper atmosphere even that fecal attraction – and that’s not bullshit. You can make excellent compost using horse manure, or fish feed out of poultry manure. And I can teach you how to make an excellent essay out of unattractive information that others would rather pass by. Your feat is my faith.

***

I don’t understand music, but I understand that song. And that just happens to be the mantra I promised you: ‘PS, I love you.’ You see, this title of a song is also an acronym. It means, ‘Paradigm shift, I look over you, the obvious.’ Paradigm shift because to move from a critical to a creative mode, you have to change your point of view – already, the comedians do that, each joke being a fillip of the mind. I look over the obvious (that is, the logical) because that brings you back to the need to suspend your belief in the workings of the logical mind (critical spirit) and anchor your faith in the creative spirit. You have to believe!

***

That brings us to Edward de Bono’s device for creative thinking, the ‘Po’ (see also my ‘To All The Dummies In The World. Or, De Bono Debugged,’ frankahilario.com). In a brainstorming session, with others or with you alone, you say ‘Po’ and change the mood so that everyone accepts even outlandish, crazy ideas to help you come up with a brilliant one. I first read about ‘Po,’ thanks to my good friend Orli Ochosa’s gift to me of de Bono’s book The Mechanism Of Mind, in 1975. I thought it was one man’s great contribution to the art of creative thinking.

***

Some 33 years later, I’m going to make my own contribution to creative thinking, beginning with science writing. Today, March 21, Good Friday, marks a death, the end of the earthly existence of a Great Mind Above All Others, that of Jesus Christ, which set off a paradigm shift from death to life. I’m glad to announce that today marks a birth, that of a humble sound, ‘PS’ (derived from ‘PS, I love you’), which I hope will at will start a paradigm shift from a despaired mood of thinking called critical to an inspired mood of thinking called creative, from life to more life. The difference is like this: If you call for truth, you are critical; if you call for fruit, you are creative. Beyond truth, PS is beyond Po; it is also much simpler – almost, yes, literal.

PS is my new theory; PS is your new practice.

***

I look at science writing as fulfilling a need, but not simply filling a real or imagined lack of knowledge.

***

And where does change begin? With the one who wants change to begin.

***

To make the poor pay attention to you, pay attention to them first.

***

Teach a man how to memorize, and he’ll have a word for a day; teach a man how to learn, and he’ll have knowledge for a lifetime.

***

The need for books is nothing compared to the need for learning.

***

It takes a village to know a leader.

***

Everything is relative; so is ambition.

***

If you cannot relate to the need, you cannot relate to the people.

***

Is capital the problem or the entrepreneur himself? I know of someone back home holding 100 titles of land himself and cannot raise capital.

***

It takes a villager to know a village.

***

Why insist on teaching in the national language when English is the universal, intellectual, commercial language? Unless of course you don’t want the people to learn more than they already know.

***

The problem with economists is that they are always after the maximum and expect that to be sustainable!

***

Communicator, remember that you are not talking to the farmer alone – you are talking to him and his family. Are you listening?

***

If you make borrowing easy, you make paying difficult.

***

Communication is too serious a matter to be left to scientists alone.

***

As a writer, your vocabulary is not a problem if already it includes curiosity.

***

Borrowing from Marshall McLuhan, remember that the technology is the message.

***

You cannot learn science in a vacuum – if people are not relating to your science, you are not relating to the people.

***

If the people are not relating to the website, the website is not relating to them.

***

We get the youth that we deserve.

***

Ask the eternal question: ‘What’s in it for you?’ Translation: ‘What’s in it for them?’ Remember, the media people have to be taught too.

***

Are you sure empowerment is the answer? Using Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, you must then first help satisfy the people’s physiological needs, then satisfy their safety needs, then satisfy their needs of love, affection and belongingness, then satisfy their needs for esteem, and then and only then satisfy their need for ‘self-actualization.’ Otherwise, you’re simply irrelevant.

***

Remember also: Bullying sometimes come from the experts in an atmosphere called consultancy.

***

If you look at intelligence only one way, then intelligence is not one of your virtues.

***

‘PS, I love you’ is all about thinking creatively, not simply thinking critically. In your writing, always think to be productive, not counter-productive. Think to be constructive, not destructive. At the very least, think to be inventive, but not invective.

***

In the arts or sciences, working in any mass medium, your greatest contribution to society is your thinking, which is ultimately reflected in your essay, editorial, commentary, column, blog. The writer’s fate is writing; this writer’s faith is writing the best.

waging a revolution

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘Grey-To-Green Revolution. 2 Launchings, 2 Models, 2 Tactics’

Outside, the scenery was drab; inside, the scene was subdued. Nothing unexpected was expected in the old auditorium. Even humor seemed out of place.

***

Early this week, some 250 delegates from the countryside and the cities were in attendance that first day of a national conference set March 12-14 in the City of Batac in northern Philippines, and the first thing MMSU Professor and Emcee Josie Domingo said was, ‘Ladies & gentlemen, we’re making history!’ Far at the back of the PhilRice-NTA auditorium, I heard her loud and clear. I also noticed nobody did clap. I didn’t. It seemed a hyperbole worth not a laugh but a cold shoulder.

***

I said nobody noticed. We were about to launch the Grey-to-Green (G2G) Revolution in the country and nobody was excited. I wasn’t. It must be that history is in the head, not in the eyes. History is not in the sight but in the foresight, more in the hindsight. You don’t see history – you view history. You don’t take a photograph of history with a flash bulb but with a flash of insight. Later, not sooner.

***

Or perhaps the delegates were (I know I was) thinking about the 15^th of March, the day after the conference, the ides of March, the day Roman Emperor Julius Caesar was assassinated, ‘a day of infamy’ (Jennifer Vernon, 2004, nationalgeographic.com). Would the first days of the launching prove to be in fact the last days of the National Sweet Sorghum Program of the Philippines, as in the case of the imperious Caesar who was slain by those who called themselves ‘the liberators’? Perhaps, sweet dreams must die.

***

Today, March 15, the ides of March, as I begin to write this, I realize we were making history, even if nobody else noticed. We were in fact launching a Revolution, even if nobody called it that – and with a crop hardly anyone talked about in the Philippines until last year. And the place where the unofficial declaration of the Revolution was made was as unpromising as can be: It is the auditorium of the complex that houses one of the stations of the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) as well as accommodates the National Tobacco Administration (NTA), and it is located within the campus of the Mariano Marcos State University (MMSU). When you declare a sweet sorghum revolt in the land of rice and tobacco, what do you expect? I can imagine blank stares and empty thoughts.

***

Most of the delegates had been to conferences before. Officially titled ‘First National Sweet Sorghum RD&E Review and Planning Conference’ – where R is research, D is development and E is extension – the Batac conference was sponsored by the Department of Agriculture-Bureau of Agricultural Research (DA-BAR), Commission on Higher Education (CHEd), Department of Science and Technology-Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (DoST-PCARRD), International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT), and MMSU. That was a motley group that seemed unlikely to agree on one agenda, much less a modern-day Revolution.

***

ICRISAT scientist Belum Reddy came for ICRISAT Director General William Dar. CHEd Executive Director William Medrano was in attendance. And so were Executive Director Pat Faylon and Crops Director Joy Eusebio, both of PCARRD. MMSU President Miriam Pascua was there. Provincial Agriculturist Norma Lagmay came for Ilocos Norte Governor Michael Keon. As National Team Leader for Sweet Sorghum as well as MMSU VP for Planning & External Linkages, Heraldo Layaoen was in effect directing the whole show. DA-BAR Assistant Director Teodoro Solsoloy attended for Director Nicomedes Eleazar. DA-BAR Consultant Santiago Obien came, being the brains behind the conference. I came with the brains.

***

Have you ever heard of a revolt launched with so many distinguished individuals armed only with seeds of an undistinguished crop foreign to a country? Sweet sorghum was going to change the lives not only of the Ilocanos in the Ilocos Region but other Filipinos in the quiet countryside as well as the noisy cities of the Philippines. The City of Batac was silently challenging Imperial Manila, raucous as ever, to behave intelligently. Cities now in competition, the crop of Manila were sour grapes; the crop of Batac was sweet sorghum.

***

I heard the Father of ICRISAT’s sweet sorghum Belum Reddy call it the ‘Wonder Crop.’ ICRISAT Director General William Dar already calls it a ‘Smart Crop.’ I shall now call it the ‘Sweetheart Crop.’ We are referring to the same species: sweet sorghum. A witness to history made this week, I assure you Miracle Rice was never as good as this.

***

Yes, Miracle Rice happened in the Philippines, in the municipality of Los Baños, Laguna. And yes, the Sweetheart Crop happened in the Philippines, in the City of Batac, Ilocos Norte, at the campus of the Mariano Marcos State University (MMSU). Miracle Rice gave birth to the Green Revolution in Asia; it was wrought by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). The Sweetheart Crop is giving rise to the Grey-to-Green Revolution declared by the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT). The Green Revolution happened in the time of President Ferdinand E Marcos, the Grey-to-Green Revolution is happening in his birthplace. Another heroism, another time.

***

At the city plaza is a huge sign that says, ‘Batac, Home of Great Leaders.’ A leader is an initiator, a guide, an inspirer, a commander all rolled into one. Ferdinand Marcos was one; I call him the Benevolent Dictator. During his presidency, inside what he called The New Revolution: Democracy, science flowered in the Philippines. I know that personally: I worked as the Chief Information Officer of the Forest Research Institute, which he created by presidential fiat; he created many others, including the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCARRD) and of course the MMSU, which he named after his father. Gregorio Aglipay was another great Bataqueño; he was a Catholic priest who joined the revolutionary movement called the Katipunan (Society) against the Spanish colonizers. Katipunan General Artemio Ricarte was yet another; when everybody had been stilled or stopped, he never quit, fighting the American invaders until he was captured. And in contemporary times, Santiago Obien built the Philippine Rice Research Institute (PhilRice) from scratch paper in the 1980s to a world-class institution in the 1990s that Asian governments have come to respect and IRRI has come to recognize as a rice force by itself. In achieving such a feat, Obien almost single-handedly elevated rice science management in the Philippines. Batac should be prouder still.

***

If you visit the Ilocos Region in March, you will note that almost all of it is dry, drab, grey. The soils are poor in health and starved of moisture. They have been in such a poor state for ages. They are perfect for what I now refer to as the official launching of the Grey-to-Green (G2G) Revolution in the Philippines. Sweet sorghum is perfect if you want to go from grey to green because this crop has multiple uses (see my ‘The Smart Revolution,’ frankahilario.com) and it thrives even on impoverished soil, which makes it indispensable in greening the earth to mitigate climate change. With sweet sorghum, you grow your crop, you replenish the earth.

***

In fact, the G2G Revolution was born and raised in Patancheru, India, within the campus of ICRISAT, with William Dar as Captain of Team ICRISAT (see also my ‘Al Gore Of Science, frankahilario.com). Sweet sorghum coming to the Philippines is like William Dar coming home to Santa Maria, Ilocos Sur. In 2000, Dar became the first Filipino (and the first and only Asian) to be the leader of ICRISAT, one of 15 centers for agricultural research that the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) advocates for and administers. Belum Reddy is the Principal Scientist on Sorghum Breeding of ICRISAT; with the innovative leadership of William Dar, Team ICRISAT has successfully diffused the technology to a private investor so that now thousands of Indian farmers are growing sweet sorghum canes for Rusni Distillery (see my ‘To Harvest The Sun,’ frankahilario.com), and everyone is harvesting from inspired inputs and learned labors. Science with a human face.

***

The distillery model was the one launched at the campus of MMSU with Undersecretary Mariz Agbon representing Secretary Arthur Yap. This model could be like the one Rusni Distillery has put up in India in collaboration with Team ICRISAT. The crusher will be producing ethanol in large scale. The theme adopted for the Batac conference emphasized the big-scale model: ‘Synergizing linkages for a commercially viable and sustainable bioethanol industry in the Philippines.’ Big is beautiful.

***

The village model was the one launched at the village of Bungon within the city limits of Batac. Farmers own the crusher, and they would be turning the sweet sorghum juice not into ethanol but into jaggery for sale as well as for products that the markets of food, feed, forage, fuel and fertilizer would demand in small to medium scale. The theme adopted neither mentions nor implies village-scale sweet sorghum-based income generators, but these did come up during the conference anyway, as they should. This crop is for both gas and cash. Sweet sorghum is for the capitalist with his ethanol distillery as well as for the small farmers with their village-level multiple products. Small is beautiful.

***

The distillery model makes sweet sorghum a capitalist crop, the capitalist with his big dreams. The village model makes sweet sorghum a farmer’s crop, the farmer with sweet dreams.

***

In June last year, I called sweet sorghum ‘a rich man’s choice of a poor man’s crop’ (‘ICRISAT & The Profits Of Boom,’ frankahilario.com). Along the same lines, now I’m thinking of these creative areas as my reason for calling sweet sorghum a Sweetheart Crop for the big businessman as well as the small farmer:

(1) distillery for bioethanol and by-products of processing
(2) jaggery for sweet products
(3) grains for feeds, forage or foods
(4) bagasse for fuel or organic fertilizer.

***

On the second day, participants were divided into separate workshop sessions. I joined the Information, Education & Communication (IEC) group; with my friend Rudy Fernandez, we had 2 writers. Josie, yesterday’s announcer of the Revolution, was with us. With her firm but gentle guidance, we agreed that IEC was a small part of a bigger thing we could conveniently call Social Mobilization, which was composed of 5 parts: Advocacy, Networking, Community Organizing, Capability Building, with IEC in the middle connecting people (with apologies to Nokia), tying up everything. That to me was a minor achievement. We of the IEC did not look up to ourselves, did not assume that we were entitled to a separate agenda.

***

It was Josie Domingo who gave our session’s report, as our Chair Marlowe Aquino had left for abroad. She was too serious for me. If I had made the report, because we would report last, I would have joked:

I admire all of the previous groups’ reports. They were all excellent. But, you know, as good as you are, we IEC people will cover all of you. (Pause.) We will all be on top of all of you! I hope you’ll like it.

***

Thinking along these lines, I can see in my mind’s eye that in the global challenge called climate change, rising above all will be sweet sorghum, the champion.

hero, heel

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘The Fractured Hero. Lozada’s Logic & Performative Contradiction’

Rodolfo ‘Jun’ Lozada (JLo to me) is the new folk hero of my country, the Philippines, a fractured culture. In his own eyes. And in the eyes of his family. But which family? He has publicly admitted keeping more than one, so I don’t know.

***

JLo is the newest folk hero also in the eyes of the Black & White Movement, inspired by Cory Aquino (our once-housewife President, Time’s Person of the Year for 1986), and in the eyes of some priests, some preachers, some brothers, some sisters, some members of civil society, some businessmen, some professors, some students, some schools, some media, some leftists. Some company! If they swoon over the fractured logic of JLo, what can I say about their learning on Western Philosophy in college? Not much.

***

Suppose they don’t really accept Lozada’s logic but he is their hero anyway, they applaud when he opens his mouth anyway: what do I make of that? That shows the Philippines is a land of opportunity, and you find opportunists everywhere, especially in Manila. I think they’re making JLo a sacrificial lamb. Opportunists do that to you; they want you to be their hero, not they.

***

I’m worried about the high school students, especially the girls, who have made JLo their favorite male performer in a major role, their movie star, their celebrity. JLo asserts that he loves his country, and that is why he has come out in the open and has been speaking against the powers-that-be. JLo, somebody’s patriotism is the first refuge of somebody’s scoundrels.

***

When provoked, everyone will say he loves his country. But, JLo, your patriotism must not be at the expense of logic. I don’t begrudge you all those hysterical girls who adore you, maybe even want to kiss you passionately on the lips, but all those girls will fail in Western Philosophy and make their own lives miserable. I’m a teacher; I don’t want to fail anybody. (And yes, I got a perfect grade of 1.0, Excellent, in Western Philosophy, at the University of the Philippines, a tough act to follow.)

***

There are 3 ways of looking at the HullabalLozada, so much fuss about so much cash, the political storm that has wreaked mayhem in Imperial Manila (thank God the havoc is confined there), the furor over the 329 million-dollar national broadband project (NBN) between China (ZTE) and the Philippines. To mix metaphors, the philosopher-scholar’s verdict on the performance of JLo in a starring role can be viewed in any and all of these:

(1) It’s a performative contradiction – a philosophical view: ‘Do not do what I do, do what I say!’ A teacher’s delight.

(2) It’s a logical positivism – another philosophical view: ‘You don’t have to be logical, just positive!’ A critic’s delight.

(3) It’s a Lozadian Search & Replace – a scholar’s view: ‘You don’t have to be realistic, just consistent!’ An advocate’s delight.

***

You don’t understand? I don’t understand JLo either, but let’s give the truth a try. He says he’s after the truth, and so are we. We owe it to ourselves, and our children. And after this exercise, I pray the truth will set us free!

***

(1) JLo’s Performative Contradiction

‘You are guilty of performative contradiction.’ I did not say that; Fr Ranhilio Aquino did. Fr Ranhilio is a lawyer; he said that first in his March 3 open letter titled ‘Why I Cannot And Will Not Support Calls For The President’s Resignation’ (gov.ph). The vociferous Philippine media are afraid of that letter, and did not report it, not even a teeny-weeny bit mention of it. The mass media ignored a 3-page letter coming from the Dean of the Graduate School of Law of San Beda College. What’s the matter – they have no respect for the law? Or no respect for San Beda? I checked and I learned that San Beda is a college run by Benedictine monks, one of the leading Catholic educational institutions in the country, whose mission is ‘to produce men and women who are fully human, wholly Christian and truly Filipino’ (sanbeda.edu.ph). ‘Where are the Christians when you need them most?’ I asked earlier (‘The Stonecasters,’ frankahilario.com). Now I know where to find one.

***

‘Performative contradiction’ is a mouthful, but, JLo, you have said more mouthfuls than anyone alive in this country since the Americans invented free speech. You have been making the rounds of schools too. Fr Aquino says that when you assert that you are searching for the truth about GMA and at the same time insist that GMA resign, you are guilty of performative contradiction. Perform, act, do; contradict, deny, disprove. That is because you are condemning her as guilty even while you (are saying you) are looking into whether she is guilty or not. With your performative contradiction, JLo, GMA is guilty until proven otherwise. A damaged logic.

***

If you my reader still do not yet quite understand what the philosophical term means, I offer my examples of the logical crime of performative contradiction:

We’re earnestly searching for the truth.
We’re rummaging for proof of her guilt.
We’re looking for someone to pin her down.
We’re combing for evidence against her.
We’re scouring for clues of her crime.
We’re going to check a lead on her.
We’re assiduously investigating.
Those are 7 counts against her.
Ergo, she should resign.

It would be funny were it not pathetic.

***

The exact words of Fr Ranhilio are these:

When one protests his earnestness in search of the truth, and at the same time presses for the resignation of the President, one is guilty of ‘performative contradiction.’

In other words, JLo, not only that you (embracing your advocates) have prejudged the case, not only have you sentenced the accused, but you are also calling for the carrying out of the sentence on the wife and not on the accused because she happens to be President of her country and you don’t like her face either. You know that the bigger they are, the harder they fall.

***

(2) JLo’s Logical Positivism

JLo is very logical and very positive about it all; let us understand his logical positivism.

But of course, JLo insists. He knows that for every crime, there must be some punishment. That’s logical. JLo is positive that the First Gentleman (JMA) is guilty of corruption; he is not accusing GMA of the same crime, but he positively wants GMA to resign as President of the country anyway. That’s JLo’s logical positivism. It must be that at the university, they don’t teach logical positivism like they used to.

***

(3) JLo’s Search & Replace

Consider this part of the Lozadian script:

JMA is sick.
JMA is not an innocent one.
JMA’s silence means guilt.
JMA is slick.
JMA is untruthful.
JMA is not to be trusted.
JMA is shamefaced.

In Word 2003, if you want to change a name that occurs 7 times for instance, from JMA to GMA, it’s best you use Search & Replace: Press Ctrl+H, type the name of the one you want to replace (JMA), press Tab, then type the name of the one you want to replace it with (GMA), press Enter. Done! It didn’t take a minute, did it?

After you do a Lozadian Search & Replace, what do you get? This is the new Lozadian script:

GMA is sick.
GMA is not an innocent one.
GMA’s silence means guilt.
GMA is slick.
GMA is untruthful.
GMA is not to be trusted.
GMA is shamefaced.

I take it that that’s what JLo wants to do: Search for the truth (JMA )and replace with GMA, so that the innocent-until-proven guilty becomes guilty-until-proven-otherwise. Then replace GMA with JLo. Brilliant. Wrong.

***

The HullabalLozada is all about searching for the truth and at the same time replacing the one on whom the truth is being searched for, based on the presumption of guilt of the one not being accused. Fractured logic. If you are reading this and you are not a Filipino and you find it a difficult act to follow, remember we in the Philippines have to live with it all these days of our lives!

hope, hype

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘The Audacity Of Hype. Barack Obama Runs Scary, GMA Runs Scared?’

Writers and candidates and the opposition could all learn from front-running US presidential hopeful Barack Obama: He started campaigning when he was only in Grade 3, and started hyping himself in 1995 through a book, even before he became Senator. Now he’s hyping himself as the only hope of his country. When you dream big, you have to hype yourself to be up to it. That’s scary.

***

My President, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, is being hyped by the individuals & those united in their opposition (the Intuit Opposition) as the Philippines’ only obstruction to peace and prosperity in my country. When you dream big, you have to hype yourself against somebody bigger than you are. But like GMA, the Intuit Opposition don’t scare me, I’m afraid.

***

In 1995, as a creative writer, Obama authored Dreams From My Father: A Story Of Race And Inheritance, an autobiography, published by Three Rivers Press (480 pages, reissued 2004). Some 11 years later, in 2006, he wrote Audacity Of Hope: Thoughts On Reclaiming The American Dream, also published by Three Rivers Press (375 pages). Both books are bestsellers; they show that language is a necessary tool for winning people to your side, even if all you have done as Senator is write 1 book and 0 legislation. More than a picture, a book is worth much more than a thousand words if you know how to write. Obama knows. Look at the titles of his books, and you will know he has the gift of language. Look at his campaign slogan: ‘Change we can believe in.’ If you have the gift, flaunt it.

***

In the Philippines, the Intuit Opposition, I’m glad to say, are not one bit of Barack Obama. The Intuits don’t have dreams from their fathers – only GMA has, from her father Diosdado Macapagal, who became a good President of his country. What the Intuits have in common with BO is the audacity of hope of becoming President, except they don’t have BO’s gift of gab. What they have is the gift of grab.

***

The Black darling of TV hosts Oprah Winfrey herself says Barack Obama has ‘an ear for eloquence and a tongue dipped in the unvarnished truth’ (BBC, news.bbc.co.uk). Nowadays, truth scares me. Truth, ah, how many crimes have been committed in thy name! That is when we invoke the truth, we invoke the truth and nothing but the truth, so help us God. But God, when you’re running determinedly for President of the United States of America, or when the determined Intuit Opposition are going against you as President of the Republic of the Philippines, truth is not enough. Or you haven’t heard of The Rotary 4-Way Test:

Of the things we think, say or do:
1. Is it the TRUTH?
2. Is it FAIR to all concerned?
3. Will it build GOODWILL and BETTER FRIENDSHIPS?
4. Will it be BENEFICIAL TO ALL concerned?

***

The Intuit Opposition are daydreaming! And they would be accuser, judge and executioner. What is the truth about Jun Lozada’s allegations? To force GMA to resign for the alleged sin of someone else (her husband) is not Rotary fair, not Rotary goodwill, not Rotary beneficial, not Rotary better.

***

In 1970, when he was in Grade 3 and living with his American mother and Indonesian foster father in Jakarta, Indonesia, in an essay on what he would like to be when he grew up, his teacher Fermine Katarina Sinaga says Barack Obama wrote that he ‘wanted to be President,’ that ‘he wanted to make everybody happy’ (March 25, 2007, Kristen Schamberg & Kim Barker, ‘The not-so-simple story of Barack Obama’s youth, chicagotribune.com). The early boy gets the worm?

***

In the Philippines, the Intuit Opposition want to become President and want to make everybody happy – everybody except GMA, except Vice President Noli de Castro, except those who believe in her, except those who believe in the rule of law, except those who believe that the Intuit Opposition is all Metro Manila noise barrage, except those who do not believe in trial by publicity, except those who practice Christianity by neither casting the first stone (nor the second, nor the third, nor the last).

***

Combine a finesse of language with an unfinished ambition and you have a candidate who may yet be the first Black American President of the United States of America.

Combine the lack of finesse of the Intuit Opposition with their unfinished business and you only have ambition (and dirty linens) hanging in the air.

***

In the US, according to Ali Gharib (February 29, ipsnews.net), Obama is winning, ‘driven by fervent youth support and a coalition of African-American voters and middle-class whites.’

In the Philippines, youth groups have intensified calls for the ouster of GMA (pinoypress.net). The youth are driven by fervent adult support I call here the Intuit Opposition and a coalition of the willing to believe that to accuse him is to prove her guilt. My God! The Intuit Opposition have neither the gift of gab nor the gift of logic.

***

Obama’s inspiration for his second book, Audacity Of Hope, is ‘a leftist black nationalist preacher, Jeremiah A Wright, who preaches African-American unity through antipathy toward whites’ (March 26, 2007, ‘Obama’s identity crisis,’ Steve Sailer, amconmag.com). That’s scary. Obama borrowed the title of that book from one of Wright’s sermons. Everybody steals. He has been likened to him, but BO is not an original like JFK was.

***

I don’t know of the inspiration of the Intuit Opposition, which includes the Black & White Movement, except now I can see their lack of respect for the Rotary knowledge of good and evil, which is certainly not black & white.

***

When Obama became in 1990 the first African-American Editor of the Harvard Law Review, Random House gave him a book contract. ‘Originally, he intended to write a disquisition on race relations, but the puerility of his theorizing discouraged him’ (Sailer as cited, my italics). So Barack Obama wrote instead about Barack Obama: Dreams From My Father.

***

The puerility of the theorizing of the Intuit Opposition in the Philippines should discourage anyone from supporting them. Else, one of them better write Dreams Of Empire From My Father while the Intuit iron is hot, and it may become an Obamian bestseller. That would be entrepreneurship.

***

Obama is pro-choice, that is, if I get it right, he believes that the right of the individual takes precedence over the right of anybody else, including the rights of the families of the mother and the father, including the right to life of an unborn baby. Sorry, BO, but a million women’s need each to have an abortion does not pass the Rotary test a million times.

***

In fact, BO fears for the rights of individuals in ‘an assertively Christian nation!’ Read on:

Democrats, meanwhile, are scrambling to ‘get religion,’ even as a core segment of our constituency remains stubbornly secular in orientation, and fears – rightly, no doubt – that the agenda of an assertively Christian nation may not make room for them or their life choices.

***

It looks like Barack Obama equates religion with substance, instead of things hoped for; it seems BO equates religion with evidence, instead of things not seen. And does he see himself as someone who would supply the need of Americans for a sense of purpose, instead of them seeking it for themselves?

Each day, it seems, thousands of Americans are going about their daily rounds – dropping off the kids at school, driving to the office, flying to a business meeting, shopping at the mall, trying to stay on their diets – and coming to the realization that something is missing. They are deciding that their work, their possessions, their diversions, their sheer busyness are not enough. They want a sense of purpose, a narrative arc to their lives, something that will relieve a chronic loneliness or lift them above the exhausting, relentless toll of daily life. They need an assurance that somebody out there cares about them, is listening to them – that they are not just destined to travel down a long highway toward nothingness.

It seems to me that Barack sees the need of Americans for their God to say He cares about them, and not that His people care about Him and therefore obey His commandments:

I am the Lord your God. You shall not have strange gods before me.
You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
Remember to keep holy the Sabbath.
Honor your father and your mother.
You shall not kill.
You shall not commit adultery.
You shall not steal.
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.

God, help us because we’re helpless.

***

In our household the Bible, the Koran, and the Bhagavad Gita sat on the shelf alongside books of Greek and Norse and African mythology. On Easter or Christmas day my mother might drag me to church, just as she dragged me to the Buddhist temple, the Chinese New Year celebration, the Shinto shrine, and ancient Hawaiian burial sites. But I was made to understand that such religious samplings required no sustained commitment on my part.

Religion to Obama’s mother Ann Dunham was only an object of anthropological study. Religion is not a serious matter; religion is only theory, not practice; or, if practice, not best practice.

Religion was an expression of human culture, she would explain, not its wellspring, just one of the many ways – and not necessarily the best way – that man attempted to control the unknowable and understand the deeper truths about our lives.

I am glad to report that religion in the Philippines is a matter of theory and best practice. The Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) are not calling for GMA to resign (newsflash.org). Their explanation? They are not into politics. No, of course not! The CBCP are not throwing any stone at anybody. But they are not telling anyone not to cast aspersions or throw stones at somebody called GMA. The CBCP are not perfect either.

***

Religion was not a reliable standard of truth to Obama’s mother. And he believed her to be right:

And yet for all her professed secularism, my mother was in many ways the most spiritually awakened person that I’ve ever known. She had an unswerving instinct for kindness, charity, and love, and spent much of her life acting on that instinct, sometimes to her detriment. Without the help of religious texts or outside authorities, she worked mightily to instill in me the values that many Americans learn in Sunday school: honesty, empathy, discipline, delayed gratification, and hard work. She raged at poverty and injustice.

***

I understand it was Obama’s mother’s instinct and not some higher authority or force that was the determiner of what is kindness, charity, love – and he adored her for that. Her values were perfect for him:

***

It is only in retrospect, of course, that I fully understand how deeply this spirit of hers guided me on the path I would ultimately take. It was in search of confirmation of her values that I studied political philosophy, looking for both a language and systems of action that could help build community and make justice real. And it was in search of some practical application of those values that I accepted work after college as a community organizer for a group of churches in Chicago that were trying to cope with joblessness, drugs, and hopelessness in their midst.

How can you work for a group of churches when you believe in secularism? I don’t know. Ask Barack Obama, the individualist:

My work with the pastors and laypeople there deepened my resolve to lead a public life, but it also forced me to confront a dilemma that my mother never fully resolved in her own life: the fact that I had no community or shared traditions in which to ground my most deeply held beliefs. The Christians with whom I worked recognized themselves in me; they saw that I knew their Book and shared their values and sang their songs. But they sensed that a part of me remained removed, detached, an observer among them. I came to realize that without an unequivocal commitment to a particular community of faith, I would be consigned at some level to always remain apart, free in the way that my mother was free, but also alone in the same ways she was ultimately alone.

***

To Barack Obama, it is the church that is the agent of change in society; if I understand Catholicism at all, it is the individual who is the agent of change himself (embracing herself).

***

It was because of these newfound understandings – that religious commitment did not require me to suspend critical thinking, disengage from the battle for economic and social justice, or otherwise retreat from the world that I knew and loved – that I was finally able to walk down the aisle of Trinity United Church of Christ one day and be baptized.

I say, if you do not suspend critical thinking, your religious attachment will wash away with the first rainy day that comes your way. While faith does not erode reason, reason erodes faith. Science and religion don’t mix. Liberalism and Christianity don’t mix. Either I didn’t know that Christ came for economic and social justice, or I don’t know your Christ.

***

In my country the Philippines? Same banana. The Intuit Opposition are speaking of economic and social justice, but not of Christ, not of being Christians.

***

Yesterday, March 4, I was accosted on the campus I was visiting by two boys, not too young, one with a cell phone with a camera, and that one asked me if I didn’t mind being on video for a class assignment. History. Ah. 3 minutes? He was going to ask me only one question, and it was: ‘What is Christianity?’ I thought, this is not coincidence. I said, more or less, thinking fast:

Christianity must be about Jesus Christ and the commandments of God. You must obey at least the two greatest commandments. The first is to love God. The second is to love your neighbor as yourself. I’m not sure of the exact words. Now, some people are condemning some people. What did Jesus Christ say to the mob when he was accosted with the woman caught in adultery? ‘He who is without sin, cast the first stone.’ We are all sinners! Do not condemn! That is Christianity.

As I spoke to the cell phone, I showed I was a little angry and increased the volume of my voice. I was thinking of GMA and the Intuit Opposition. I was thinking of renewal.

***

Renewal is what we all need. What is the answer to renewal? Barack’s Republican opponent in 2004 was Alan Keyes, and he had the answer that Obama rejected:

His (Keyes’) argument went something like this: America was founded on the twin principles of God-given liberty and Christian faith. Successive liberal administrations had hijacked the federal government to serve a godless materialism and had thereby steadily chipped away at individual liberty and traditional values. The answer to American renewal was simple: Restore religion generally – and Christianity in particular – to its rightful place at the center of our public and private lives and align the law with religious precepts.

I find that I agree with the opponent of Barack Obama, that Keyes is talking more sense than BO is making. I want to tell the Intuit Opposition that the answer to Philippine renewal is simple: Restore religion generally – and Christianity in particular – to its rightful place at the center of our public and private lives and align the law with religious precepts, not have the religious precepts align with the law. Morality must be above the law. Morality is what the Rotary 4-Way Test is all about. BO fails the Rotary test; so does the Intuit Opposition in the Philippines. Nobody is perfect. Now don’t tell me you are the savior of my country!

***

His wife Michelle says of him: ‘Barack Obama is the only person in this race who understands that before we can work on the problems, we have to fix our souls. Our souls are broken in this nation’ (ipsnews.net). Yes, Ma’am! Including the souls of Barack Obama and the Intuit Opposition.

***

Why have I written what I have written (try ‘The Stonecasters’ and ‘An Inconvenient Troth’), and why am I writing this, and why am I writing more after this? You see, I have the audacity of hope.

Bible metaphors

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘Your Metaphors Man. ‘The Journey Back To Me’ – Ricky Lee’

Truth revealed. There are 3 things that make the Catholic distinct from any Protestant chic: While Protestants believe 100% in the Bible, Catholics believe 100% in the Bible, 100% in Holy Tradition, and 100% in the Magisterium, the teaching authority of the Church. So I say, the Protestants are Okay in that they believe in God 100%; the Catholics are A-OK in that they believe 3 times more – they believe 300%. Of course, I’m a Catholic.

***

So, what is truth? To the Catholics, truth is what the Bible says, and what Holy Tradition says, and what the Magisterium says, taken all together. If you invoke the Bible only, your truth is incomplete, to say the least. If you want to bring the wrath of God on some people you have publicly condemned using the Bible only as your basis, you can cast the first stone if you are without sin. Better to remind yourself that you’re not God.

Is that Catholic chic or Catholic redundancy? Both. In the Philippines, the treasures of Catholic chic and redundancy you can find nowadays in most publications of Shepherd’s Voice (shepherdsvoice.com.ph), such as the magazine Kerygma in photo, as by and large they present the Catholic seduction, in print, as each article of faith leads the reader to one’s own exciting exploration of many a discoverable truth. Condemnation is the opposite of seeking the truth.

***

Preachers or not, Protestant or not, the truth we preach we find difficult to practice. It is easier to condemn others than to condemn ourselves, offenders that we are.

***

‘God, please give me back my sanity.’ But God wasn’t listening to me! So I said there is no God. And in answer, God didn’t speak to me for years; that would be about 35 years. Tatlumpu’t limang taong walang Diyos. Can you survive 35 years without God? I know I did. But barely. If it wasn’t Hell, it was Purgatory. And I got married in March 1967, 2 years later. When my wife Amparo told me she was pregnant with our first child, that was about the end of May that year, working backward from date of birth, February 14, I immediately blurted out, ‘Puede bang …?’ (‘Can we …?’). My wife was horrified, and I instantly knew that in those 2 words, God forgive me, I had already said too much.

***

Ricky Lee was going to kill himself; I was going to have somebody else kill my first baby. Ricky survived his own death wish because a soldier cared; Cristina survived her father’s death wish on her because a mother cared. Ricky felt he was ready to welcome death; I felt I wasn’t ready to welcome fatherhood. Thoughts on suicide and abortion, both about assisted death. Ricky and Frank were both trying to play God, even if they no longer believed in Him.

People who insist on their own truths either have no God, or think they know better.

***

In my own pilgrimage of years, I found my peace after my wife and I were welcomed by the Bukás Loób sa Díyos (Souls Open to God – my translation), a Catholic charismatic community, in 1991 and after years of wrestling with God and myself. One early evening, perhaps in 1995, I was walking home in our little street when I was moved to look up and saw stars twinkling, as little as they were, and it was as if God spoke to me, in Tagalog yet, when He knew I was an Ilocano and proud of it! I’m translating now: ‘How proud you are! Yet, you can’t even make one little star like any of these.’ I felt washed by a strange feeling from head to foot, and I must have shuddered a little. I never thought and felt like that before. In fact, I wasn’t even thinking of God when I looked up at His handiwork. If you don’t watch out, you discover something.

***

It’s Ricky Lee’s story that has inspired me to write this essay. A writer that he is, his story is not a script from his fertile head; it is non-fiction. About the Bible: Isn’t it fantastic stories, that is to say, fiction told by sinful and wildly imaginative humans, the most popular being gospel writers Matthew, John, Luke, Mark, and letter writer Paul? And yes, the superplots and subplots in the Bible are all incredible, improbable, impossible, like drinking water turning to drinking wine, like the blind suddenly seeing, like the sick instantly getting well with just a word said from afar, like the dead rising to life with all eyes watching. The Bible is a book of faith that either you accept or reject 100%; there are no two ways about it.

***

In fact, if you’re a Protestant, it’s sola scriptura – your faith is based 100% on what the Scriptures say. So, Ricky Lee, if you just keep on reading your Bible and never ever graduate from that, you’re a Protestant in a Catholic’s clothing – the Protestant will swear by the Bible and nothing else.

***

Not only that, Ricky, the Bible is not an easy book to understand. In the early 1990s, when my wife and I were lambs in the woods, I made sure we had many versions of the Bible so that I could understand the verses: King James Version (KJV), New KJV, New American Bible (NAB), Christian Community Bible (CCB), Today’s English Version (TEV), New International Version (NIV), Jerusalem Bible (JB). The TEV & NKJV are gone now; we still have the KJV, NAB, CCB, NIV, JB. When it comes to the Bible, my attitude is: you can’t have too many of a good thing. The thing is not to argue verse by verse but understand chapter by chapter.

***

Notwithstanding, for the Christian faith, 100% Bible is not enough; my 5 Bible versions are actually worth only 33.33%. I have already written (‘How The Bible Came About,’ thewonker.wordpress.com) about the ‘three-layered rock of faith’ of Catholics: Holy Tradition, the Bible, the Living Magisterium.

***

In non-mathematical terms, the Christian formula is this (my equation):

CF = Bible MaHT

The Bible is not enough. My Bible MaHT formula means you add the Bible to the Magisterium (Ma) and Holy Tradition (HT) and you have your Christian / Catholic Faith. Bible MaHT is beyond mathematics – it’s meta-mathematics.

Bible MaHT means Catholics believe that faith in God must be based on two other sources of divine revelation, that is to say, taken as one: 33.33% Bible, 33.33% Magisterium, or the teaching authority of the Church, and 33.33% Holy Tradition. (You protest: 33.33% taken 3 times equals only 99.99%, right? That’s the problem with man-made formulas. Don’t worry; your faith will make it whole.)

Thus, the Bible and Holy Tradition are twin guides to living in the past; the Magisterium is a guide to living in the present in the light of the guides to living in the past.

In practical terms, Ricky, my mathematical equation means that anyone’s interpretation of what the Bible says is acceptable only if it holds true with what Holy Tradition says and what the Magisterium says it is. Three heads are better than one. Holy Tradition is the recorded voice of the ancient Church fathers; the Bible is the recorded voice of those prophets and priests and preachers of the past; the Magisterium is the recorded interpretive voice of the present. Divine revelation must be relevant to the present, or it isn’t divine at all.

***

Go on and read your Bible, but Ricky, don’t forget that Comforting Companion is only one of the metaphors on Jesus Christ. In fact, ‘the journey back to me’ is your own metaphor. We cannot fathom the mysteries of life, so we live, we thrive on metaphors. What about the metaphors on God the Father (that’s the metaphor!), the Holy Spirit (like Dove), the kingdom of God (like seeds sown by a sower)?

***

‘Master, why do you teach them in metaphors?’ ‘Because that’s what they understand.’ The Protestant belief is based on metaphors coming only from the Bible. Our Catholic belief is based on metaphors coming from the Bible and from Holy Tradition (like apostolic succession) and from the Magisterium (like Mary, Mediatrix). Thank God for metaphors.

***

Metaphors increase our understanding; we are much richer for them. Metaphors cannot be measured by science; we are much richer for that. Therefore, I wish you more metaphors!

The mess, mass media

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
An Inconvenient Troth. The Mess Media In The Philippines

With the Manila Muddle created by themselves, Manila mass media are now trying to control, provide, sell information towards their kind of revolution, which is described by Archbishop Angel Lagdameo, President of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) (abs-cbnnews.com) as ‘a new brand of people power.’ I believe the Archbishop and the arch enemy of every Philippine President, the Manila mass media, are misreading the signs of the times. Or trying to change them.

***

Placards, posters, masks, caricatures, telephone calls, T-shirts, text messages, banners, all manners told, all anti-GMA. ‘Gloria resign!’ ‘Down with GMA!’ Variations of a media theme that began immediately after Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo became President in 2001 when People Power 2 kicked the butt of Joseph ‘Erap’ Estrada, Clown President. They didn’t like her at all, the male chauvinist pigs, the ones who have been plotting one coup after another, with the media applauding each with one hand clapping – you wouldn’t know they’re applauding, would you?

***

Erap doesn’t like GMA either, even after she pardoned him for his Big Sin called Plunder. Well, some people are a little grateful, some people are big ingrates. Erap is now moralizing against GMA. With his clown English, I’m not sure Erap understands what the dictionary sense of plunder is – in fact, I doubt if he knows what a dictionary is, or how one looks like.

***

Certainly much more literate than Erap, but look at what mess the mass media in Manila have wrought to our understanding of the requirements of countryside growth, countrywide progress. They have always gotten away with murder; I mean, what Manila wants, Manila gets. And that’s not what I want. All declaring that they are saviors of my country, now they are all anti-GMA forces, they of diverse species. Let me then be inventive and, using the American Heritage and Encarta Dictionaries, I shall define and describe to you those collections of species in the Manila Zoo using what I call Frank’s Anti-GMA GMA (Group Metaphors for Animals); it shouldn’t be too hard looking anywhere in Metro Manila for:

(1) An anti-GMA colony – a gathering of animals or people who live under similar circumstances, under the same control by someone or something. You can check the squatter areas along the railroad tracks both sides in the cities of Manila and Makati. Unwanted colonies. GMA is bent on driving the squatters away, which is only right. The squatters have been literally blocking the way to progress in those cities. And I wouldn’t be surprised if the members of such a colony were treated as canon fodder by politicians – vested interests paying peanuts for others to attend rallies and demonstrations for them so that they may not expose their own warm bodies. In business, I believe they call that minimizing risk.

***

(2) An anti-GMA brood – a gathering of offspring under the care of a creative source, a nurturer. Didn’t John the Baptist warn, ‘You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?’ (Matthew 3: 7 New American Bible). That would be about minimizing sin.

***

(3) An anti-GMA clutch – a gathering of birds hatching together. What are they hatching in those dark places? I hope it’s not about minimizing the population.

***

(4) An anti-GMA covert – a gathering of coots, which are black & white species, really! That would be the Black & White Movement (BWM), a middle-class performance, not a high-class act like the BMW. They should learn to minimize their performance from hereon.

***

(5) An anti-GMA covey – a gathering of grouses, complainers. The rallyists inevitably see only something to gripe about, to find fault with. It’s easy to be negative – Just say No! They should minimize their grievances.

***

(6) An anti-GMA drift – a gathering of herd or flock being moved or driven, especially pigs. Pigs are those animal species who grow bigger and bigger on the fat of the land. They should minimize their greed.

***

(7) An anti-GMA drove – a gathering of those driven from one place to another. The ones attending the demonstrations and rallies may have come driven all the way from Laguna and Cavite and Bulacan and Batangas, all expenses paid, with some extra cash thrown into human pockets for them to offer some pockets of resistance to the Government. Attending rallies as an income-generating activity should be minimized.

***

(8) An anti-GMA flight – a gathering of those moving with great speed together, a gathering of eagers. I say that would be Senator Antonio Trillanes and his faction in one instant declaring a revolt at the Manila Peninsula Hotel and vowing to die for what they believed in, and then in the next instant surrendering meekly to the Philippine National Police. (See my ‘Manila Rain-Walk. The Day Senator Trillanes Called A 5-Star Revolt, Peter Parcel Drank Coffee & The Bride Danced,’ frankahilario.com). The brashness of the elite should be minimized.

***

(9) An anti-GMA flock – a gathering of domesticated population. These would be the ones who belong to out-and-out anti-GMA groups, they know who they are, who have been tamed into submitting to the fire-and-brimstone preachings of blabbermouths. The flock have nothing more to say once the leader has spoken. The leader should minimize his speech and let the flock have their say.

***

(10) An anti-GMA gang – a gathering of a pack engaged in unloverly pursuit. When GMA became President after Erap was ousted by People Power 2 in early 2001, the chauvinist males of the species were instantly in hot pursuit of their quarry, who had changed sex. Male chauvinism should be minimized.

***

(11) An anti-GMA herd – a gathering of those herded by humans who would proclaim themselves as intelligent beings, and who would encourage everybody else not intelligent enough to join rallies. Turning into meek lambs, not a single protest can be heard from this group. Such spectacles should be minimized.

***

(12) An anti-GMA litter – a gathering of beings just hanging around, not knowing anything better to do. That would include the taxi drivers who have the same opinions as TV hosts and newspaper editors, who themselves belong to an anti-GMA covey, which see. One-track minds should be minimized.

***

(13) An anti-GMA pack – a gathering of wild dogs or wolves. The wild dogs you can’t teach new tricks, the wolves you can’t touch with a ten-foot pole: one mistake and you’re mincemeat. Power packs should be minimized.

***

(14) An anti-GMA pride – a gathering of lions on the loose. They pounce on anyone or anything that moves, these kings of the asphalt jungle. Why not have those kings emasculated, their threats minimized?

***

(15) An anti-GMA rout – a gathering of beings in a movement, either of knights or wolves. Since I don’t see knights in shining armor, they must be wolves. May their tribes decrease!

***

(16) An anti-GMA school – a gathering of animals or humans who have learned or subscribe to only one thing. In this case, that one thing would be to hate GMA. Limited learning is a dangerous thing.

***

(17) An anti-GMA shrewdness – a gathering of apes, or monkeys. Well, the great apes aren’t known for being smart, the monkeys aren’t known for being original, so what else is new? Shrewdness also means an aggregation of imitators – the ones who have no fresh, new or improved ideas, the ones who simply mouth the slogans of others without thinking, the opposite of shrewdness. Let’s minimize monkey business, especially in Congress.

***

(18) An anti-GMA skulk – a gathering of vermin, which are foxes or thieves. Foxes are wily creatures, and I see many of them; thieves are thieves even if they happen to be in Malacañang, in the Senate or in the House of Representatives. Let’s have less of the wily and more of the willing.

***

(19) An anti-GMA swarm – a gathering of 10,000 warm bodies migrating to one designated place in Makati for the day’s protest or rally. Another day, another swarm. Let’s have more of the cooler heads.

***

(20) An anti-GMA troop – a gathering of people on the move. Mostly non-military, the anti-GMA troops are armed only with stick and stones with which they can hurt your bones. It hurts to see people like them being exploited by those who pretend to be advocates of the welfare of the poor. Let’s have truly more advocates and really less of the poor.

***

(21) An anti-GMA shoal – a large gathering of fish, sea animals, or people. This I’ve yet to see! 10,000 rallyists is a fishpond at the back of the house; 1,000,000 warm bodies seen together at one time, that’s a sea of humanity. I was part of the sea of humanity in People Power 1. I watched on TV the sea of humanity that was People Power 2. Today in Manila they have the mass media, they have the mess, but not the mass, certainly not the critical mass. None of the CBCP has the charisma, the mass appeal of Jaime Cardinal Sin, the Godfather of People Power.

***

Considering all that, why are all those anti-GMA people the wrong revolutionaries that Manila mass media should be advocates of? Because they are only advocating a change in leadership – they are only advocating a change in clothing, from that of wolves to sheep.

***

Frank Hilario: I’m advocating a parliamentary form of Government (see my ‘The Stonecasters. ‘We Are Our Own Best Enemy’ – Tony Meer’).

Tony Meer: Won’t work. If you just change people, or system of Government, same story. The change must come from each one of us, from within.

That from a lawyer-soldier-hero (read his book, A Lawyer’s Fate & Faith, 2003, published in Mandaluyong City by Antonio Malvar Meer, 500 pages), who never forgets to pray before every meal. God answers prayers, if we do more than just mouth the words.

***

The mass media of Manila say they are after the truth. If they insist, let them define first what they mean by truth. When Pontius Pilate asked, ‘What is truth?’ he did not stay for an answer. Are the Manila mass media perhaps Pontius Pilates, asking only a rhetorical question, knowing that there is only one truth – what they say is, is?

***

The Manila media should know better! Learning from Tony Meer, I say the Manila mass media should forget their advocacy of another People Power Revolution, should forsake the pursuit of the truth. Media is a different species from what they know, or profess to know. Professor Deborah Spar of the Harvard Business School says clearly (July 2000, hbswk.hbs.edu), ‘Media is about information, the control of information, the provision of information, the sale of information.’ Not about the truth.

***

So I say, Manila mass media, forget all those frantic attempts at People Power. Learn your lesson and know that you are going after the wrong revolutionaries. And Archbishop Lagdameo, I understand you were speaking for yourself, not the CBCP. You should advocate instead an old/new brand of people power and go after the troth. As you are about to learn, if you don’t already know, troth also happens to be good advice for those about to get married, and my son Jomar and his girl friend Clarisse are getting married tomorrow, March 1, at Camp Aguinaldo, a convenient place. Troth, according to American Heritage 1993, is betrothal; one’s pledged fidelity; good faith; fidelity. According to Encarta Dictionaries 2008, troth is a solemn vow, solemn pledge, especially the promise to remain faithful exchanged by a bride and groom or an engaged couple. If troth be told, let Filipinos be the bridegroom and let Filipinas be the bride. That would be The Wedding Of The Millennium.

***

In fact, I advocate a higher troth: the revolution of the heart. An Inconvenient Troth, I know. But it would be the nicest and the truest revolution of all.

Jesters & jokers

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘The Stonecasters. ‘We Are Our Own Best Enemy’ – Tony Meer, Filipino’

February 25 – 22 years after People Power 1 drove out of this country benevolent dictator President Ferdinand E Marcos, 7 years after benevolent clown President Joseph Estrada was deposed by People Power 2, many jokers and jesters are still trying to stage People Power 3 against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. They are the stonecasters at the adulterous woman of biblical times. They hate the sinner, not the sin; if they hated the sin, they would have to hate themselves.

You can hate at your convenience.

***

I recognize GMA’s Metro Manila Dilemma yesterday, today and tomorrow – damned if you do, damned if you don’t – because of all the clamor for good governance by those who don’t recognize it when they see it. They are the blind followers of the stonecasters.

***

Who are those who persecute, vilify, revile the woman? They are the many churched and unchurched, private and public, literate and illiterate, rich and poor, civilized and barbarians – they masquerade as saints. They can hide their faces, but they cannot hide the facts. They too are sinners. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of good.

***

I ain’t a saint myself. But as a writer I must proclaim my faith in the status quo, the establishment, even as lawyer Tony Meer must state his case of his state, the Philippines. The writer must profess even as the lawyer must confess love of country especially when everybody else seems to un-love her. Patriotism is the first refuge of soldiers, the last refuge of scoundrels.

***

No matter what the stonecasters say, it is not Adios, patria adorada! I believe it is not Adios, beloved country. I also believe that good men should do something, should dirty their hands. I believe with Abraham Lincoln that ‘He has a right to criticize who has a heart to help.’ So I want to enter politics without running for office. Politics is the first refuge of scholars, the last refuge of scoundrels.

***

Entering politics has now been embraced even by the Roman Catholic Church, with Fr Eddie Panlilio winning as Governor of Pampanga, the home province of GMA, and whom he has condemned as sinner in multimedia: TV, print, audio, video, Internet. Modern media have their uses.

***

In contrast to the big mouths in the Big City of Metro Manila, the small people in the rest of the Philippines celebrate life such as by growing the biggest squash in town, the biggest eggplant, banana, guava. ‘This is the kind of People Power that we want,’ says La Union Governor Manuel Ortega, ‘People Power that will bring our nation forward and not People Power that will drag down our country from development’ (Jun Elias, Feb 26, abs-cbnnews.com). The people have spoken. Amen!

***

The pie of politics is there for all to snatch slices from, or contemplate the recipe. Today, I prefer to contemplate the recipe in relation to a bigger pie: society. Her critics focus their contemplation, nay condemnation, on GMA; but she is not big enough, she is not society. GMA’s condemners do not condemn themselves as they should; they are men (embracing women) wearing masks, not unlike the Makapilis of Tony Meer’s time. If this society is being misled by Makapilis, we’re back to World War 2.

***

To put an out-of-the-box perspective to all the extravagant displays of statesmanship in Metro Manila, let me make a paradigm shift and refer to Nicanor ‘Nicky’ Perlas, my favorite student, who wrote an astounding book in 2000 titled Shaping Globalization: Civil Society, Cultural Power And Threefolding (274 pages, published in Pasig City, Philippines by CADI & GlobeNet3).

Nicky’s proposal he calls Threefolding, that is, the application of cultural power on the social forces for the good of society itself. ‘All activities in societies emanate from three separate but interacting realms,’ Nicky says. ‘These realms of society are its culture, its polity, and its economy’ (page xxi). The three forces are Civil Society, the State, and Business (180). He is like saying, if the State is in control, it’s a dictatorship; if Business is in control, it’s profiteering; if Civil Society is in control, it’s heaven. That’s the theory.

***

Today, February 24, I find that I must add after the Third Force not a Fourth Force but a force that gives meaning to the Three Forces – and this is the Moral Force. This is not the Truth Force, and it is not meant to set anyone free – no one can ever be free in a society. Moral yes, that is, edifying, virtuous, reputable, ethical, principled, honest, decent, proper, honorable, just, right, good.

***

Now, whether silent or noisy, do the Roman Catholic or Protestant clergy constitute the Moral Force? I a layman say, clergy or not clergy, you do not constitute the Moral Force if you do not preach and practice the two greatest commandments of God.

I will grant you the first commandment – you love God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind. Now, do you love your neighbor as yourself? If you condemn him (embracing her), the sinner, you are the opposite of the Christian, no matter what church or denomination or group you belong to.

***

They are the stonecasters, the ones who dare proclaim by their acts that they are without sin. Many a columnist and journalist of a Metro Manila newspaper, many a TV broadcaster and host, many a Senator, many a blogger, many a priest, many a preacher, many a prominent citizen, even many a college student – each one of them, male or female, has been brazen enough to come out in public and throw not just one but many stones at the woman they have accused of being a big sinner. They want her to suffer the punishment for the sins of the nation. They want her as sacrifice.

***

I desire mercy, not sacrifice. I did not come to call the righteous but sinners (Matthew 9: 13, NAB).

But nobody is listening, Lord. Everyone is speaking all at the same time, and everybody is saying the same thing: ‘I accuse!’ They will say that to anyone, to a tape recorder, especially in front of a TV camera. But they cannot say for themselves, ‘Not guilty.’

***

I asked our common friend, another Tony (Oposa), a noted surgeon, to arrange for a dinner meeting for us so I could congratulate Tony Meer heartily and interview him. Why him specially? Because, as it happens, I know he loves his country, my country, the Philippines. Through Tony O, I had met him and I had read his book and had been sufficiently awed (see my ‘Remembrance, Remonstrance,’ frankahilario.wordpress.com).

FAH: When Christ associated with sinners, he did not condemn them, he did not vilify them, he did not persecute them. Someone I know is very negative about GMA. Half in jest, I emailed him that I wanted to strangulate the Filipinos who were very negative about their own country. I thought he would never talk to me again.

TM: We are our own best enemy.

FAH: Best, not worst. I like that! It’s so negative and yet it’s so positive.

***

Worst, we go down the dustbin of history. Best, we go the way of the Promised Land. A promise is a promise – we have to make it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

***

Can we depend on the raucous mass media and the boisterous politicians to lead us to the Promised Land? Not if they continue to portray the Rebel as Hero and the Government as Villain. (Read Tony Meer’s indictment of the mass media for their glorification of the Oakwood Mutineers, when TV, radio and the press reversed the roles – August 13, 2003, a full-page ad in the Philippine Star; reprinted in full on pages 474-479 in A Lawyer’s Fate & Faith.)

***

 ‘Power to the people!’ should not be ‘anarchy to the people!’ or ‘power to the media!’ Shame on you mass preachers, and shame on you mass media! You judge, you condemn, you do not pardon. You practice the exact opposite of Luke 6: 37. You do not lift up – instead, you pour into our lap a good measure, you press down, you shake all together so that everything runs all over us.

***

FAH: Do you know a Mariano Angeles, a UP Vanguard? You’re not a Vanguard, are you?

TM: My brother was a Vanguard, not me.

FAH: In effect, the ROTC is dead, right? I read Angeles in the Internet (‘On A Citizen Armed Forces,’ geocities.com/artesguerra). In my time, I was against the idea of being forced to take up the ROTC. After reading Angeles, now I like the idea of a citizen army, reviving the ROTC.

TM: A citizen army makes sense.

***

Angeles’ Vanguard’s Faith is that the ROTC is a force against elitism in the military. Not apart from that, what is My Writer’s Faith?

Oinam Anand says, ‘The chief mission of the writer is to struggle for peace and upliftment of society in which he lives. This role is determined not only by his place in literature but also by the degree of his involvement in the society’s public life’ (e-pao.net). For me, a writer’s role is a citizen’s role, but more because of his power over words, which is power to reach out with ideas. And what is the role of a citizen in a society? To love and let love. To be moral, not amoral. Morality is above all, even above the moralists.

***

My Writer’s Faith is to keep faith with the vision of my people, not with those pollsters, not with those politicians, not with those pundits of virtue, not with those prophets of doom.

***

Meanwhile, the media are playing their roles with gusto, even with guts and gory: opinion polls, news & columns in newspapers & magazines, as on radio & TV & in websites, including Senate inquiries ‘in aid of legislation.’ They already have their reward. 10,000 protesters (possibly including Communists and certainly including Catholics) gathered in Makati City February 15 to demand the resignation of GMA, the media reported (manilastandardtoday.com).

***

Now, what about the rest of us, what about the best of us – what about the intellectuals?

***

Preachers and preached, priests and priested, rebels and rebelled, media and mediated: So far we have 10,000 stonecasters, the ones who have thrown stones at the woman brought out by the mob in public; we have 89 million Filipinos and not one Christian. Where are the Christians when you need them most!?

From chaos to creativity

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘Serendipity X. The Rebel Writer Writes, ‘To X Or Not To X’’

Disorder out of disorder? Yes. That’s the way I know creative thinking begins, with something that is seemingly un-pregnant with the promise of a brainchild. Once you accept that, your days as an un-creative writer are over. Then you will be the father of a brainchild one after another. Prolific. Terrific!

Welcome Serendipity X, the Serendipity Muse on call. Let x equals the unknown equals chaos equals creativity. I write this time about creativity 24/7, x’ing unlimited. Unknown becoming quantity first, then quietly transforming into quality. Structure giving birth to substance. X’ing is creative thinking like you’ve never known before. Serendipity eXtreme. To x or not to x, that is the (creative) question!

***

We begin with chaos. I am the Author of Chaos. In creating the universe as we know it, didn’t God the Great Creative start with chaos?

And the waters of chaos were upon the face of the depth, and God hovered upon the waters. And God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light, and the waters were illuminated. And God saw that it was good.

***

God didn’t like chaos, but to be creative He had to start with it. We mere creatures must go do likewise. So we have to create chaos. The thieves create chaos in order to steal, the politicians in order to divide and conquer, the mathematicians in order to be able to plot order, and our enemies in order to weaken our defenses. So why not writers and thinkers to create chaos and master it for their own purposes?

***

According to Englishman Horace Walpole, who invented the word in 1754, Serendipity is ‘accidental sagacity’ (Richard Boyle, 2000, livingheritage.org), that is, making a discovery when you’re not out making any discovery. So I say Serendipity is unconscious creativity, accidental genius, finding something wonderful when you’re not out looking for something wonderful. Great! Serendipitously, I have come up with my own; I say Serendipity X is conscious creativity, deliberate genius, actively searching for bright ideas by way of controlled chaos. As I shall show you in this essay, chaos is the raw material for creativity. With Serendipity X, bits and pieces of the confusion become the sparks of genius.

***

In fact, ‘Serendipity X’ is merely a new name for what I have been doing for the last 20 years or so, fooling around with ideas in what I happen to be writing, editing or reviewing (see my ‘PC Fools,’ frankahilario.com). So I know that Serendipity X is more creative than Edward De Bono’s Lateral Thinking, that which I have studied myself, and more promising than Tony Buzan’s Mind Mapping, that which I have seen at work. Indeed, it is more exciting than Julia Cameron’s The Artist’s Way and less exhausting, as there is no daily journaling required at the self-appointed time, and any time you’re at it, Serendipity X gives you creative, quality time.

***

In Serendipity X, handled with an impossible mix of credulity and incredulity, chaos becomes creative chaos. You don’t have to be crazy, but it works!

***

Yes, it just so happens that Serendipity X is born on the same day People Power was born, both events major and minor reflecting a coming to terms, liberation from the shackles of thinking like slaves, thinking inside the box. People Power liberated a country from a dictatorship of the elite with the formula of government; Serendipity X liberates the writer from a dictatorship of any formula of writing.

And yes, my coming up with its name shows that Serendipity X works like a charm. My previous drafts of this essay had the brief titles of first, ‘Creator Of Chaos,’ then ‘Author Of Chaos,’ and nothing mentioned about Serendipity.

***

Why do I use my own hands to type my own notes? They go to my head. And when they do, I can digest them. That’s using my head using my hands, two necessary steps toward creativity, using the memory of the eyes and the memory of the mind. If you want to be a good writer, you have to be a good typist; if you want to be a better writer, you have to learn word processing (worping). With worping, the software becomes your second mind, with which you can graduate to creative chaos.

***

Since about 20 years ago, outlining using software has been the open secret to my productivity for other people and my creativity for myself. I have been using Word in all its incarnations – except Word 2007, by which Bill Gates’ Microsoft unfortunately has turned me into a total dummy, what with all its strangely new, Out-Of-This-Word command module. Well, nobody’s perfect, including Bill Gates. That’s why I’m not on speaking terms with this strange species (see my ‘Call Me User,’ frankahilario.com).

***

Notwithstanding, I have found that Word 2003 is the perfect word processor (worp) for the writer in me, so now I am more than willing to freely share with you a few little Word commands for outline-organizing your own way to a higher level of creativity.

***

Now, can you be creative without learning Word’s outline-organize feature? Of course. But with Word as your worp, you can be x times more creative. With Serendipity X, outline-organizing is actually fooling around with ideas, and I have already written that you have to become one of my ‘PC Fools’ to become really creative (frankahilario.com).

***

Now all you see is this:

(1) The Quick Brown Fox
(2) Five Puzzled Boys
(3) Donuts
(4) Mascot.

So, can you be a creative writer and combine all 4 topics and write 1 charming little essay? Probably not.

Now, for the magic of outline-organizing: Select the whole line (3) and drag it up so that it follows (1); so now it reads like this:

(1) The Quick Brown Fox
(3) Donuts
(2) Five Puzzled Boys
(4) Mascot.

Click View, Outline again. Just looking at those 4 lines should now give you ideas. My ideas are these: You can feed donuts to the quick brown fox and the lazy dog. And actually, the mascot (teddy bear) was called ‘Frank’ and that was the one the six quiet girls were kissing. Creativity, Sir, is the name of the game.

***

Be sure to include in your search indirectly related topics, as merely scanning them will surely increase your understanding of your topic at hand.

Tagging your little notes will give you more ideas. The title you assign Heading 1; the tags you assign Heading 2. And then to create a great deal more disorder: you gather some more notes, jot down some more thoughts. Try assigning Heading 3 to some tags. Click View, Outline, then hide the texts and see if you can move around some of the headings together with the texts underneath them. Surely ideas will come to you how to organize what you’re writing.

***

As my book The Rebel Writer’s Guide For Non-Dummies will show, if you can’t create great disorder, you can’t create great order. (In sequential order, you have been reading from Chapter 1 to Chapter 3. If you want to be a creative writer, I recommend that you start with Chapter 3, which is this one.)

***

Remember this: You are your own creative god. Creator of Chaos – that’s what you should first become, what each writer should first become if he wants to be creative, or to be more so.

***

You must cultivate that chaos habit. When being the author of chaos becomes second-nature, Creativity becomes second-nature to you. You’ve grown accustomed to her face, to her wiles, to her blessings.

***

To mix metaphors: When you’re creative, wherever you go, sometimes you bring a closed flash drive and always an open mind; you have perhaps 4 gigabytes in your hands but certainly infinite, enigmatic bytes in your head.

***

If you’re a writer and you don’t know outline-organize as according to the Word 2003 paradigm, you don’t know what you’re missing. Try it sometime! Drag your headings and subheadings every which way – along with the corresponding text of course – and see instantly if this sequence makes better sense or that sequence makes much better sense, or this tag & text will have to go, or this text will have to be the beginning or that text will have to be the ending, or this statement is the first thing to say to attract attention or that statement is the last thing to say that leaves a better aftertaste.

***

Now then, you might say Serendipity X is outline-organizing (OO) plus the unknown (X) equals OOX, license to thrill. With Serendipity X, outline-organizing becomes one of the most powerful tools for creativity that I have ever seen, and I thank Microsoft Word for that.

***

In Serendipity X, or creative chaos, the journey itself is many journeys; you are always making a new first step, never the last, until you’re happy with the end results. Going the way of Serendipity X is an adventure into the unknown, creating chaos in mind as a foundation for creating essay on paper. Sounds crazy it just might work!

***

To x is for me to take notes and add more and tag and retag them and create and recreate my outline using my favorite worp. With Serendipity X, Word’s outline-organize is the best thing that ever happened to my writing. With this feature not found in any other word processing software that I know of, it’s a Wonderful Word out there for creative writers who want to be the best they can be. I wish them only the best.

Fooling around, creative writing

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘PC Fools. The Rebel Writer Writes Of Slaves & Masters‘

The great science fiction author Ray Bradbury says, ‘A computer is a typewriter. I have two typewriters, I don’t need another one’ (James Hibberd, 2001 August 29, archive.salon.com). So, one of my favorite writers is one of my PC Fools. Having written 107 essays in the last 105 weeks in the American Chronicle alone, edited and desktop-published my own book (read ‘My American Book,’ frankahilario.com), I know that in creative writing, if you don’t fool around with the PC, you’re a fool.

For the last 2 decades, I’ve been saying that the typewriter is for critical thinking, the personal computer is for creative thinking. If you got it right, you’re a creative journalist. Otherwise, you’re just one of many mechanical-thinking reporters.

And then I have just found another Luddite, another refuser of the computer. Even as he is ‘America’s leading political satirist’ (GA, groveatlantic.com), PJ O’Rourke is ‘the biggest Luddite in the western hemisphere’ (Christopher Koch, 2007 January 30, advice.cio.com). That makes two of the world’s biggest PC Fools. The personal computer is nowhere in Bradbury’s and O’Rourke’s past, present, future. If they can’t learn from the modern world, why should they teach the modern world anything? Well, we can learn from their mistakes.

You see, PC Fools, there are three of those kinds:

Fool #1, the one who rejects the PC and feels good about it; he is the master of his own inferiority. He is a fool; he discards what he has not even tried. Shun him.

Fool #2, the one who accepts the PC yet he treats it like a typewriter; he is the slave of his own mediocrity. He is a fool; he doesn’t know what he’s doing. Teach him.

Fool #3, the one who embraces the PC and treats it as a device for creativity; he is the master of his own superiority. He is a fool; he fools around with the PC because in that way, the machine becomes his slave; and he knows that fooling around is a most delightful way to be creative; in fact, it is the only way. Follow him.

I know which fool am I; do you know which fool are you?

Fool is the way to go. Foolishness is the secret of creativity. I just remembered a parallel line by Ralph Waldo Emerson: ‘A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.’ Logical and rules-bound is not the way for creative writers. Oh men of little faith!

That is to say: Creativity is fooling around; a lot of creativity is a lot of fooling around. That’s what I meant when I wrote earlier, ‘Genius is 10% perspiration and 90% inspiration’ (‘My Law Of Graffiti,’ January 22, frankahilario.com). As much as you can play the fool, as much as you can be creative.

Actually, many people decline to use the PC because they are awed by it, or think they are too old or too stupid to learn, or don’t realize how they can improve productivity tremendously. This is not to mention that quite a number don’t want to improve their productivity at all – they only work for the money. Certainly, I say to you, already they have their reward.

Here, I will assume that you are none of those rejecters of the PC, and that you know that you will write better if you knew more about your software. ‘I can’t be bothered’ and ‘That’s the work of my secretary’ and ‘I can afford to pay somebody’ are each a lazy man’s excuse, or that of a writer who doesn’t want to be good at what he’s doing. So, what do you want? Me, I want to be the best!

Recording – Typing and correcting. Making, reviewing and revising your drafts, from the first to the last, your worp is best suited for these tasks, what with the eminently practical flash drive for backup copies. The worp wasn’t much before the flash drive, when the eminently affordable storage material was the floppy 1.4MB disk that could easily catch a mold.

Yes, your best ally in writing is the word processor. And why not? The worp takes care of the routines of writing (like typing with tentative sentences, revising without retyping, doing the spelling check) while you take care of the creative (like tagging, moving pages about instantly using outline-organize and viewing the results). That is, if you want to be the best you can be as a writer.

In Chapter 2, which is this one, I want you to learn just 13 commands of Word 2003 with which to fool around with ideas out of the box in your creative moments.

Divorce is for people who want to fool around. I fool around too, but only with ideas. I mean creative writing is a lot of fooling around. You can’t fool around if you’re the slave, if you’re not the master of what you’re doing, of what you’re using.

I heard she has been writing essays. I wouldn’t be surprised if Maria Sharapova turns out to be a very creative writer one of these days. Already, she is master of her own game.

‘There are no tyrants where there are no slaves,’ wrote my hero, the Philippines’ National Hero Jose Rizal more than 100 years ago. No more slave. Master is better.

Because it’s impossible

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘TLE‘

‘To love everyone.’ I imagine Jesus Christ answering my unasked question. ¶ ‘Sir, you’re telling me that that is the greatest commandment?’ ¶ ‘Yes, sweetheart.’ ¶ ‘But Sir, why is it the greatest commandment?’ ¶ ‘Simple. Because it’s impossible.’

One can be so sadistic, really. I understand. I have to. It doesn’t mean I can do it, but if I am to follow, I will will it, will all my heart, will all my soul, will all my mind. To love everyone. Know then that that’s my statement of pure purpose, that’s my commitment of pure living. Wish me will.

‘To love everything.’ That too.

Christian theory must translate into Christian practice. I know. So, today, let me look back at the past year and see instances where TLE is theory and where it is practice in my intellectual life. Here then are observations new and old and based on 600 email exchanges (I use Gmail) between a handful of us in the last year, not sequential, identifiers omitted to protect both the innocent/guilty, where NE is a composite of people and the email entries have been edited.

NE. If I were a US citizen, I will vote for Hillary as President and Barack Obama as VP. I have finished reading the book by BO, The Audacity Of Hope. He’s going to be a great man!
PO. In his own eyes.

NE. Despite the idiocy, only in the Philippines, I greet you Happy Valentine’s Day!
PO. I accept the Valentine’s greeting.

NE. But such is life, we have our share of happiness and handicaps, lucks and lapses. Acceptances, adjustments, adaptations – Hans Selye.
PO. Love and let love.

NE. David Brown’s book, yes, I have it. I think you should get a copy for yourself and read it too. As I said, it is a ‘guide to life without tears, fears and boredom.’
PO. That’s not life.

NE. Kung Hei Fat Choi!
PO. That’s Greek to me.

NE. The philosophy of sex by some famous people.
PO. That’s not philosophy – that’s physiology.

NE. Paradoxes of Our Time. I have read several versions of this, but this is The Best. Hope you like it, enjoy it.
PO. I viewed it again anyway. I could have written it myself. To love each other is the question of the time. And the answer is in the inside of each of us.

NE. The friars really screwed up the Filipino mind and made them believers in the religious or Catholicism, as part of their conquest and subjugation of the muchachos and muchachas to serve the señoras and señores.
PO. They didn’t know any better.

NE. God have mercy on our people and country. Indeed a very Catholic country and people, but and yet, graft and corruption is so rampant.
PO. Talking and thinking about corruption won’t make it go away. There are no corrupts if there are no corrupters. And the corrupters are the people. Blame the people!

NE. The Psychology of Real Happiness, by psychologist Martin Seligman.
PO. If you’re looking for real happiness, you’ll never find it.

NE. Well. Let’s face it, some of us know how to wear and carry our clothes. The others, no matter what they wear, they still look like a monk eh!
PO. Me, I don’t mind looking like a monkey. I don’t mind my looks anymore. Now I mind my manners.

PO. My latest American Chronicle article has humor + Charles Darwin + Shakespeare’s Hamlet + Edward De Bono + Al Gore + Robert Frost + Saint Paul + AIDA + Noah’s Ark + Saint Francis Of Assisi + A disguised ten commandments of writing. Enjoy!
NE. I’ve glanced at the article. Another masterpiece.
PO. (A glance and he can tell it’s a masterpiece. He must be a genius.)

NE. For those who are gone, we reflect, recall beautiful, happy memories of them, but our sights and sounds and actions should now be focused on the living and not on those who are not around anymore. Do not waste your time and effort and expense sending cards anymore.
PO. I’ll send you virtual places to visit and virtual flowers to smell.

PO. The pastoral text of James B Reuter is this: In spite of all your hardship, in spite of all your suffering, your life will be beautiful if you love everyone and everyone loves you. Yes and No, Father. Yes, because if everyone loves you, what a wonderful feeling! You are the center of the universe. But no, because I imagine not everyone loves me, or can love me, as I am not the center of the universe, and that’s good enough for me. ¶ What is important is that I love everyone, even if not everyone loves me. ¶ I cannot wait for everyone to love me before I can be happy; I can be happy right now, loving everyone, including the unlovable. Ah, that’s the challenge, isn’t it? If you want to test your love, try and love those whom you hate, and let’s see what happens to them, what happens to you. ¶ Another way of testing your love is to forgive someone whom you cannot forgive, not on your life, never! And, can you lend money without interest? Can you lend money at all? Can you give to the poor, to the beggar, without thinking about how lazy they are? And, can you love those who have been trying to overthrow the government? Love knows no rules, no borders, no limits.

NE. Maybe he will finally get himself a desktop or a laptop. Without my computers, I would not be a happy man at all!
PO. I would be happier.

NE. About ½ hour ago, I opened the TV as I was sending-receiving emails and what did I see? Benny Hinn and thousands of suckers.
PO. Not millions? I’m a sucker for miracles myself.

NE. Akiane – Genius – A must-watch. This is the most talented child artist you have ever seen. The daughter of an atheist paints pictures given to her by God and she gives him the credit. ¶ Her mother is no longer an atheist. ¶ How many more unbelievers will God touch through her?
PO. If you need Akiane to make you a believer, you don’t have much belief at all. Belief goes beyond wonder and into love.

NE. Anyway, it is really the companionship that is more important.
PO. Actually, it’s the love.

NE. There are really lots of us who can do good for our country. Unfortunately, we are not in the government hierarchy.
PO. Even if you were, you can only affect policy. It is easier said (policy) than done (process and product). Do something!

NE. I may be ashamed to tell you, but I am not about to be an idiot voter next month.
PO. Me, I have not been a voter for the last 28 years. And why is that? A silent protest. A silent statement that the hope of this country does not lie on leaders but on us.

NE. What tree did you fall from? Find your birthday and then find your tree.
PO. The tree of life.

NE. Really, we should have a Lee Kwan Yew or Mahathir as leader. Their countries are not perfect but among the greatest.
PO. If Malaysia is a great country and Singapore is greater, I don’t want the Philippines to be a great country.

NE. I am happy again that a Filipino will address the graduates in Harvard.
PO. I’m worried that everyone wants to address the problem of leadership and none the problem of followership.

NE. Glad to read what you wrote about fathers. My daughter came to see me and spend the night with me. We watched a movie and played some games and ate salad and soup and just hanged around with each other. It was a blessing. Miss you and him. Wish to see both of you healthy and enjoy life to the fullest. ¶ Pray for me as I recover from surgery of cancer of the lung. The name of the cancer is bronchoalveolar carcinoma of the right lower lobe.
PO. The surgeon removed the tissues with cancer, not the cause of the cancer.

NE. One Sunday morning a mother went to wake her son and tell him it was time to get ready for church, to which he replied, ‘I’m not going.’ ¶ ‘Why not?’ she asked. ‘I’ll give you two good reasons,’ he said. ‘One, they don’t like me, and two, I don’t like them.’ ¶ His mother replied, ‘I’ll give you two good reasons why you should go to church. One, you’re 54 years old, and two, you’re the pastor!’
PO. The two good reasons for not going are the two good reasons for going. Precisely because they don’t like you, you should go. Precisely because you don’t like them, you should go. That’s church.

NE. To tell you the truth, it is a lot of effort – thinking – preparing the presentation. Especially trying to create something new and innovative. ¶ But it is real fun. As the saying goes, when you love what you are doing, it is not work.
PO. By the way, I’m listening to Tony Bennett. My sound system is not half as good as yours, but it’s the best because it’s the one I’ve got!

NE. Tell me humans are sane.
PO. If we think the world is mad, we are.

NE. Filipinos denigrated on ABC’s Desperate Housewives. I wonder? Somehow, this episode does not seem to bother me. Am I less patriotic?
PO. It doesn’t bother me. We Filipinos denigrate ourselves, so what else is new?

NE. NUTS!
PO. You go nuts eating fresh fruits. You also go nuts eating your heart out.

NE. You won’t be able to write at all, anymore, when your hernia strangulates.
PO. I know all about hernia. I know all about strangulation. I’d like to strangulate people who are very negative about their own country! So help me God.

Maria masters Sharapova

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘Ana’s Lament. Learning Life’s Lessons, Maria Sharapova’s Phoenix Rises’

The Serbian loser was disappointed, of course; she had only her tears to show. The Canadian reporter was disappointed too; she had only her complaints to write. They were both missing the point – the January 26 Australian Open victory of the Russian winner was of another kind. It was psychological. It was less a tennis player’s mastery of her opponent than a tennis player’s mastery of herself. Your first and best opponent is always yourself.

It’s a point of view. ‘The tennis was hardly memorable: unimaginative at best, tense, error-prone and mediocre at worst.’ That is Stephanie Myles of Canwest News Service describing the January 26 Australian Open finals between Russian Maria Sharapova and Serbian Ana Ivanovic (canada.com), where Maria won 7-5 & 6-3 in 91 minutes. That’s some Reporter’s Notebook you’re keeping, Stephanie. My guess is that you have been watching the wrong pretty game, or rooting for the wrong pretty girl. Pretty isn’t on the outside.

The Best, I insist, because you don’t look at the finals as if it were the only game played. Even in women’s tennis, you have to be holistic, not only ballistic. Maria Sharapova defeated all 7 opponents in 2 weeks under the sweltering heat of the Australian sun. That’s the Big Picture Down Under or Up Top. If you’re not broad-minded, you miss the Big Picture. You have to be broad-minded; you have to look at the elephant. (Now then, you might also want to read about the Big Picture I have written about, ‘The Green Elephant Of India,’frankahilario.com.)

Neil Harman says Maria’s victory shows she is ‘the second best player in the game today’ (timesonline.co.uk). Wrong! Neil; Maria Sharapova is the best player in the game today, period.

Christopher Clarey says, ‘This season is off to a perfect start: seven matches and seven victories with no sets lost despite one of the toughest draws conceivable’ (nytimes.com). She had to play against World #3 (Jelena Jankovic), World #2 (Ana Ivanovic) and World #1 (Justin Henin) and demolish them on the way to winning the Australian Open. When the Top 3 Balls fall one after the other because of your serve, what should they call you? #1.

Her coach Michael Joyce says, ‘If you put the whole tournament together, for sure it was the best tennis she’s played.’ Ever. Michael, there is no other way to put it except together. You don’t win a title playing only the last and decisive game. Leo Schlink is singularly astute and emphatic, saying ‘Sharapova proved she was the best player in the world’ (news.com.au). You’re a winner, Leo; congratulations, Courier-Mail (Australia).

And Ana’s Lament? Ivanovic is ‘left to lament a stack of unforced errors as she hit 33 for the match to Sharapova’s 15’ (Luke Buttigieg, huliq.com). Does that mean Ana Ivanovic defeated Ana Ivanovic? Not by a long shot. Even Ana says no. She lost to a great player. She says, ‘I want to congratulate Maria for a great tournament and for giving me a tough time today’ (news.com.au.com). You can lose and be gracious.

The Melbourne victory was a sweet gift to Maria’s mother Yelena on her birthday. ‘Last year, I lost on her birthday and this year I said I’m going to make it up to her, and I did.’ You can win and be gracious.

Bonnie Ford says the Australian Open victory was Sharapova’s ‘striking return to top form in the season’s first major’ (sports.espn.go.com). In 2004, Maria won her first Wimbledon title and she was only 17; in 2006, she won her first US Open and she was only 19 (she was born 1987 April 19). In 2007, everything went wrong – she kept losing her games, the most humiliating being that Serena Williams, the #81 seed, defeated Maria Sharapova, the #1 seed in the Australian Open. She won only 3 games that time. You can lose and not be gracious to yourself.

That nerve-wracking loss was the first sign that Maria Sharapova’s world had crumbled. In 2007, she won only one title, in San Diego, in August that even she forgot (Linda Pierce, theage.com.au). She had suffered with Michael Joyce, her friend and coach, when he lost her mother Jane to ovarian cancer in April. And Maria had a cyst in her left wrist, and shoulder and hamstring and other injuries. She had known the Joyces about half of her life, meeting the family when she was about 10 or 11. It was Jane who encouraged Michael, who had stopped playing professional tennis, ‘to keep devoting time to helping the rising star’ (Bonnie Ford, sports.espn.go.com). Jane was herself already fighting ovarian cancer at the time. When Jane died, Maria was herself devastated. ‘I think the reason for that is because it’s one of the closest people in my team, in my family, that passed away,’ she says (Dennis Passa, origin.insidebayarea.com). She calls her team her family; she knows she is lucky to have her family supporting her. Q: When you have your family behind you, when can you lose? A: When you forget.

In 2007, Maria needed much encouragement, as her own injuries and ‘wounded confidence’ (Ford, cited) plagued her. Thinking back, AAP had this headline 2 days before the finals: ‘Sharapova out to erase 2007 demons’ (news.theage.com.au). No, you can’t erase demons, AAP, much as you wish to; Maria knew she had to confront them. And she did.

Linda Pearce says, ‘Tragedy close to home (was) an inspiration’ (theage.com.au). No, Linda, tragedy does not inspire you; you have to inspire yourself. The package comes completely knocked down, some assembly required. Growing up is a do-it-yourself thing.

In fact, it was more a championship match between real life and a dream of greatness in a sport one loves. Maria Sharapova had been down and almost out not by consistently better tennis opponents but by persistently bitter experiences.

Jane, mother of her coach, died. Jane had been mother to Maria too. So she had been a regular visitor at the hospital during Jane’s 6-year battle with ovarian cancer (Linda Pearce, theage.com.au). ‘It completely changed my perspective on life,’ Maria says. ‘During the time when I was practicing, the days I could practice without being injured, it was hard to motivate myself because tennis just didn’t seem important in those moments, whatsoever, at all.’ Jane was fighting, Maria was learning.

She dedicated her Australian Open (Daphne Akhurst Memorial Cup) trophy to Jane. That is because, Maria says, when Jane died, ‘after the loss that (Michael) suffered, I got a whole lot of perspective with my injuries and setbacks. It helped me prioritize so many things that were outside of tennis.’ Like life.

Her coach, Michael Joyce, says of her student and friend (Cronin, cited):

Sometimes those downs actually help you to shoot back up. And a young girl like her hasn’t been through a lot of ups and downs. It’s been mostly up, up, up. But I kept telling her, ‘It’s going to make you stronger, it’s going to make you stronger,’ and obviously it has.

No, Michael, the downs don’t automatically give you ups – you have to pick yourself up, you have to help yourself, you have to learn from life’s lessons yourself. Go ask your friend Maria herself.

In 2007 November 12, in the Madrid tournament, Maria Sharapova found herself when she lost to Justine Henin. She found she still loved tennis and had the heart of a champion, giving Henin a fight for her life in the marathon (3 hours,24 minutes) WTA final match. Maria lost, but she knew she did her best and that was good enough for her to come back from the living dead.

Justin Gimelstob credits Maria’s Australian Open victory to ‘Sharapova’s rediscovered game’ (sportsillustrated.cnn.com). No, Justin, it’s not a rediscovered game; it’s a rediscovered self; it’s Maria rediscovering Maria.

What happened? How did Maria defeat her demons? She didn’t. ‘Late last season,’ Bonnie Ford says (source cited), ‘when Sharapova couldn’t practice long stretches because of a strained shoulder and a ganglian cyst on one wrist, she found out what it was like to stop attacking a problem and simply live with it.’ She had a moment of inspiration. She had grown up. That’s the mind. Maria herself says, ‘I don’t think my body has 100% developed into its own’ (Luke Buttigieg, huliq.com). That’s the body, not the mind.

From the text (SMS message) sent by the American living tennis legend Billie Jean King the morning of the game, Maria had drawn inspiration. The text said: ‘Champions take their chances and pressure is a privilege’ (Bruce Matthews, news.com.au). From one champion to another. Used with love, the cell phone is one of our modern wonderful media; if it doesn’t bring you good news, it brings you grace.

Maria says of King, ‘She’s always a person who texts me’ if I have a tough moment or a great win’ (Richard Evans, sport.guardian.co.uk). King, now 64, had won the Australian Open in 1968, among 12 grand slam singles titles. ‘King will be proud how the Florida-based Russian heeded her words. Sharapova grabbed most of the important points of the match and stood firm when Ivanovic briefly threatened to take control late in the first set.’ It was the serve. She won a blistering 89% of first serve points. ‘She was serving so well it was hard for me to control my returns,’ Ivanovic says. When Maria won, she got another text from King: ‘Congratulations. You did great.’ Billie, it’s great when you conquer all the Top 3 in your game in one big tournament; it’s even greater when you conquer yourself.

Maria first met Billie Jean King when she (Maria) was 13 or 14. ‘From that point on, she’s just always been really supportive,’ Maria says (AP, sportsline.com). Even champions need people who support them.

Ana says of her defeat, ‘Experience will only make me better’ (Greg Stutchbury, uk.reuters.com). No, Ana, learning is not automatic; experience doesn’t teach – the learner has to learn. I know; I was a teacher. Go ask Maria herself.

Nirmal Shekar refers to Maria’s ‘test of character’ as she was down 0-30 in the first game, ‘but she came through in style’ (hindu.com), displaying ‘the red-hot form and the hunger that she has displayed over 2 weeks in the Australian Open championship.’ Playing against Ana, Maria passed.

Grant Clark and Heidi Couch say it was the ‘hard training and greater perspective on life that helped Maria Sharapova seal her first Australian Open tennis title with a straight-set victory over Ana Ivanovic’ (bloomberg.com). I say it was the greater perspective on life. ‘I had many setbacks throughout last year. I’m so happy I can come through and perform great throughout the whole two weeks.’ Among others, the death of a loved one. ‘After that loss I just gained a whole new perspective on life and my injuries and how to treat life with respect.’ She was paying attention to her inner self.

Is Maria’s smashing victory a comeback? A resurgence? No, a Phoenix Rising. The Phoenix does not rise until it has become ashes. Then and only then can the Phoenix will herself to rise. No one else will will it for her. (You might also be interested in another’s Phoenix Rising; try my ‘The Gospel Whisperer,’ frankahilario.com.)

‘Sharapova serves it to Ivanovic,’ Terry Maddaford says (nzherald.co.nz). It is her ‘almost surreal service games.’ Serves Ana Ivanovic right! I say. Serves the Australian tennis crowd too. Ana was the Melbourne crowd’s darling from beginning to end, from promise of victory to reality of defeat. When will Australians ever learn that the premise of winning depends on the pressure on the player, not the pleasure of the throng?

I’m 48 years older than but I’m a fan of the Russian. I became a member of the Maria Sharapova Fan Community some 3 years ago. I love the website too; I owe maria-sharapova.org the free image you see above, my PC desktop background (‘Sharapova Mural’). For the last two years they have sent me from the other side of the International Dateline a birthday greeting on the exact date. How many of my friends do that? None, zero, zilch! So you see, I’m a winner as long as I’m with Maria win or loss or more or less.

Why did the loser lose? Jake Niall says of Ana Ivanovic, ‘She wasn’t ready to win. So she didn’t’ (theage.com.au). You are your first and worst opponent.

Playing to a home crowd does not guarantee a win. ‘I have relatives here,’ Ana says, ‘so I just feel very comfortable here. And I feel like playing in front of an Aussie crowd is like playing in front of a home crowd.’ Ana, stop playing to the crowd and start playing to win!

Despite the loss, Ivanovic advances to World #2 in the rankings, behind #1 Henin. And Sharapova? To #4. Crazy. But you can’t win them all.

Greg Baum says, ‘Sharapova has always been easy to admire, hard to love’ (theage.com.au). ‘She presented as a prima donna, statuesque but cold. Affected on court, preening, shrieking and taking inordinately long to serve.’ (She didn’t serve until Ana stopped moving around with her squeaky tennis shoes.) Tennis Australia festooned the center court with flags, all Australian, none Russian. Poor losers!

Greg Baum quotes Maria as saying that after Michael’s mother died from ovarian cancer, ‘Tennis became so small in everyone’s perspective then.’ Life’s like that when you’re paying, not playing attention.

The winner has kind words for the loser. Maria says, ‘Ana has a wonderful future ahead of her’ (Stephanie Miles, canada.com). I say, win or lose, Maria has a wonderful future ahead of her.

There’s more to learn. Maria says, ‘I know I’ve already won three Grand Slams, I know I keep saying this, but I don’t think I’m at the peak of my career yet’ (Luke Buttigieg, huliq.com). Just wait a while, Maria, just wait a while. Growing up is hard to do.

Bonnie Ford says (cited), ‘In those moments you feel mature. You have a wonderful career. Doing something that you love to do and being good at it, there’s no greater gift.’ There is, Bonnie. The greatest gift of all is Your Own Phoenix Rising, rising out of the ashes of your defeats, failures, heartaches and then going out there and persistently if not consistently being the best at what you love to do. I know. Been there, done that.

I theorize, you practice.

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘My Law Of Graffiti. The Rebel Writer Writes, And Having Writ, Moves On’

I am not a scientist, thank God. I believe science is too serious a matter to be left to scientists alone. This time I’m going to write about theory and practice of science writing – I theorize, you practice.

Based on his deduction, Isaac Newton comes up with his Law of Gravity in 1687; based on his assumption, Albert Einstein revises Newton’s Law with his Theory of Special Relativity in 1915; based on my intuition, I have just revised both geniuses with my Law of Graffiti, 2008. The British mathematician is revised by the German physicist; both are revised by the Filipino writer. It all goes to show that insight knows no color, creed, credential, or genius.

It also goes to show that the sciences of mathematics and physics are no match to the art of creative thinking. See, there are no dull sciences, only dull scientists – or dull science writers.

I googled for “how to start” writing (including the double quotes) and got 846 English pages with Safesearch; I googled for begin OR start writing and got 11,000,000 English pages with Safesearch. Quality is in the numbers? Quality is in the Scan, not in the Search; quality is in the Googler, not in Google – Google cannot think for you.

The BBC geniuses know you have to be good first at writing to be good at broadcasting. Such advice I have found helpful myself in all my 50 years of getting to write – not necessarily getting to be published. There are far too few geniuses in the publishing business here and abroad.

He billed himself ‘America’s Mad Professor of Fiction Writing’ (he doesn’t scare me, I’m afraid).

This chapter is all about Writer’s Block, brainstorming, starting to create, beginning to write; this is all about the Search for the Holy Grail of Serendipity, for which you need freedom.

Serendipity is not about beginning right; rather, it is about beginning bright.

In one of my old favorites, his book How To Write, Speak & Think More Effectively (1963), I remember Rudolf Flesch saying, ‘Begin anywhere but begin!’ But I don’t remember him telling me how to continue. Either he forgot, or I did. (I’m 67 going on 68, and I’ve lost my copy.)

I come out with the 1st Law of Graffiti Thinking, and it is this, borrowing from genius: ‘E = mc²’ (E equals m times c squared), where E is Enlightenment (inspiration or insight), m is mass of materials, and c is the speed of write.

Graffiti, thy name is man (embracing woman) in search of a publisher, or audience. Scratches and scribbles and scrawls and doodles and drawings and images and icons and words and whatnots that you are, private media on the wall in public places, you have inspired me to reach the heights of frivolity and fertility, of quantity and quality, of madness and meaning, of coming across and coming to terms. I am glad at last I found you, you who have been in full view all the time. You are the metaphor of the unwritten, of the unborn, the visible chaos of genius in the artist hidden in man. I now baptize you The Broadcast Antennae of the Creative Race. May the Force be with you always!

The Immanent Genius in Graffiti, I can say, on hindsight: Because creativity is born of chaos; because graffiti is chaos; because it’s always loose; because it’s sometimes humorous and therefore relaxing; because it happens at different times without sequence and at different places without direction; because it’s amateurish; because anything goes; because helter-skelter; because come what may; because no rules no borders no limits no excuses; because the graffiti artist is Lord and Master – for of such is the Kingdom of Serendipity, where there is no order and law.

What you need in creative writing is freedom, release from the law.

Newton’s Law states that what comes up must come down; Einstein’s Theory states that you cannot bend the laws of physics wherever you are – my theory is that in creative thinking, obeying the dictates of the Law of Gravity doesn’t work to the artist’s advantage and, in fact, an artist cannot be creative unless he bends the laws of physics whenever he tries to create.

Metaphors actually.

When you begin the process of creative writing on science, you should be in another world other than that of science. This chapter is designed to lead you there. Not take you, mind; you have to take yourself.

How do you go about creative thinking? I say: Do the graffiti with me!

‘The Law of Inertia.’ Nothing will happen to you (and your writing) if you prefer to preserve your inertia – to break the law, do something, anything – move!

‘Lightning doesn’t strike twice in the same place.’ If you are creative, lightning will strike not only twice in the same place but many times, that is to say, flashes of genius will occur quite so often you’ll have a pleasant time not counting them. You will be energized. Yes, I think each of us has the capacity for genius. It makes me feel uneasy thinking I’m the only genius around here.

‘Work equals energy over distance.’ When you use my Law of Graffiti for brainstorming, trying to get rid of Writer’s Block or just simply beginning another piece of writing, you will get more even if you do less work and not spend so much energy. If you haven’t known about it, I have completely upended the Law of Genius according to Thomas Alva Edison; according to Frank Hilario, ‘Genius is 10% perspiration and 90% inspiration’ (see my ‘The Smart Revolution,’ americanchronicle.com). I have been inspired as much.

‘The speed of light in a vacuum is constant.’ You have to break this law. In creative thinking, you don’t want the speed of brilliance to be constant, and you don’t want to work in a vacuum!

Newton’s First Law of Motion states that ‘Every body continues in the state of rest, or of uniform motion in a straight line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed upon it.’ I’m impressing upon you that you have to break this law too. You don’t want to continue in a state of rest; that would be counter-productive. And neither do you want to move with a one-track mind; that would make your writing monotonous and tiresome.

Newton’s Second Law of Motion states that ‘The acceleration produced by a particular force acting on a body is directly proportional to the magnitude of the force and inversely proportional to the mass of the body.’ That means the speed of an object depends upon the force applied to it and the object itself. To break this law, turn it the other way around. Thus, in creative thinking, to increase the speed of inspiration, don’t force it. Like, if you are having a brainstorming session with a coach who keeps arguing against all kinds of ideas, your creativity speed is zero. (My advice: Since he cannot set the fire in you, fire him!)

Even if you and I didn’t know it as such, there is a famous example of a paradigm shift that dramatizes how creative thinking should go: Untying The Gordian Knot. I learned that in high school 50 years ago. While the tale is mythical, what happens is material as it is ingenious, inspired as creative thinking is. The story is from John Hagan (geocities.com); the words are mine:

Riding his wagon to the temple of Zeus, father of the gods, innocently Gordius fulfils an oracle, and the people make him their King. In homage, Gordius dedicates his wagon to Zeus, tying the yoke to the pole at the temple using a complex knot of cornel bark so intricate it defies unraveling. Fit for the gods. Out of the Gordian Knot, as it comes to be called, comes another oracle: ‘Whoever succeeds in untying the knot will be conqueror of all Asia.’ Every man worth his maleness tries and each one fails. Here comes Alexander the Great. He unties the Gordian Knot by cutting the whole thing with his sharp sword. With his sharp mind actually. And he goes on to conquer all of what is known as Asia. Genius knows no rules, no borders, no limits.

Now, about Alexander the Great’s paradigm shift, John Hagan views it differently: ‘Then, as everybody knows, he cheated on the oracle by cutting the knot with his sword instead of untying it.’ John, Alexander is using his head. Alexander merely changes his way of looking at the problem by what I call ‘changing the problem’ – from untying the knot to loosening it. Those other geniuses fail as they can’t cut it. In a flash of brilliance, my genius sees that the oracle does not say you can’t cut it. So Alexander the Great goes on to disprove those who say he can’t cut it.

In graffiti thinking, a term which I invented just now, which refers to creative thinking following my Law of Graffiti, when you cut & paste & delete & add to your notes and set your mind on fire, it is Your Own Phoenix Rising.

From the ashes of your graffiti notes rises the Phoenix of your creativity.

The Brooklyn Museum says graffiti is ‘a form of subversive public communication (that) has become legitimate’ (brooklynmuseum.org); borrowing from that, I say graffiti thinking is a subversive form of creative thinking that is legitimate all at once. Some people call graffiti ‘tasteless vandalism’ (wikiHow); graffiti thinking makes graffiti a form of creative vandalism – you destroy your old materials and create something new out of them. Your Phoenix Rising.

In creative writing, from out of the ashes of graffiti thinking, you and I need something like the Phoenix to rise and inspire us. Otherwise, we expire even as we respire.

Now, how do you go about graffiti thinking? Observe Frank’s Law of Graffiti:

Every scribble, scratch, scrawl, doodle, drawing, image, icon, word, whatnot is inspiration waiting to be discovered.

Been there, done that. That’s how I have been able to write 100 full essays in 100 full weeks (see my ‘100 in 100. Celebrating Centennials & Counting,’ americanchronicle.com). Graffiti thinking for inspiration, for insight; graffiti for instant gratification. So, open your mind and heart and go discover yours!

Watch ‘CSI’ and how the plot thickens; watch ‘Dr House’ and how the clot thickens. You want to write in English – get ideas from the best!

And don’t forget: While you’re reading, at all times, take notes, jot down your thoughts. In writing, jotting maketh an exact man.

The beauty of the Internet is that it is beauty always waiting to be discovered, and as an artist you should always be excited to explore both form and substance.

Nothing comes out of an empty and closed mind; with your open mind, many possibilities pop up when you read and read again, and when you take notes and make notes in your own sweet time. This is the Age of the Information Superhighway, so go out and drive and enjoy the view, smell the flowers.

Observe: Julie Miller is telling us that the right way to start writing is not to start writing right away. Assuming you have done your graffiti research, I will add to that and say that the right way to start writing is to follow the genius of Paul Graham: ‘Write a bad version 1 as fast as you can.’ Or follow Frank/Einstein’s genius: E = mc². Remember: The journey of a thousand miles doesn’t begin with the first step – it begins with the first thought. And so I leave you to the beginning of your creative writing. May the Force of Graffiti be with you always!

Think outside the box! of corn

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘To Harvest The Sun. To Sow The Wind And Reap The Whirlwind’
October 1988: Professor Hartmut Michel wins the Nobel Prize for Chemistry. January 2008: The feisty and prestigious Professor Michel continues to wage a campaign against biofuels, comes to the Philippines and wins over, among others, the feisty & prestigious Philippine Daily Inquirer – he doesn’t win me to his side. Awe-inspiring Nobel Prize winners are not always right, and neither is the awe-inspiring Inquirer.

From my analysis of the Professor’s statements above and from other sources, I can see that the Professor is making sense – and nonsense. Michel is right and wrong. I believe biofuel is not a tragedy and what Michel says is a comedy of error. You can see that for yourself right now if you can think outside the box.

The German Professor is Director of the Department of Molecular Membrane Biology of the Max Planck Institute of Biophysics in Frankfurt, Germany. Planck, German of course, the father of quantum theory, was of the opinion that atheism was an obsession with symbols (Wikipedia). (Right! Thinking inside the box is an obsession with symbols.)

While scientists were leaving Germany during the Hitler years, Planck ‘felt it his duty to remain in his country’ although he was opposed to some of the Government’s policies, particularly as regards the persecution of the Jews’ (nobelprize.org). In all my 68 years, I have never planned to leave my country and, yes, while I have been opposed to some Government policies, I have been opposed to those opposed to the Government, in her time that of Cory Aquino, in his time that of Fidel Ramos, this time that of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. They don’t know any better.

Today I’m opposed to those who are opposed to biofuels if they don’t know any better.

Is Professor Michel thinking outside the box? In the Inquirer story (2008 January 14, inquirer.net), TJ Burgonio reports that Michel was in Manila last week and spoke in the Nobel Forum January 9, Wednesday at the Philippine International Convention Center (PICC). ‘We should not put money in biofuel development. It’s counterproductive,’ the Professor told his audience. I wasn’t listening – I wasn’t there.

That is not a valid assumption, Professor Michel. You cannot assume that when Indonesians and Malaysians and Filipinos grow their palm oil, first they clear their forests and, then burn everything on sight. The clearing of forests is not a characteristic inherent in the growing of biofuels; it is a choice people make. So, you can grow corn (the Yankees’ favorite), or sugarcane (the Brazilians’ favorite), or sweet sorghum (my favorite climate change crop) without cutting down a single tree in the forest. If you insist, you have a hidden agenda. Or monkey business.

Now, as Professor Teodoro Mendoza of the University of the Philippines Los Baños points out in his paper ‘Are Biofuels Really Beneficial For Humanity?’ (Philippine Journal of Crop Science, December 2007), ‘a huge amount of oil’ is consumed in the making, transport and storage of fertilizer. Let’s take the case of the nitrogen fertilizer, as nitrogen is ‘often the limiting factor in crop production.’ That’s about 2 liters of oil to 1 kilo of nitrogen. (Not only that. Mendoza points out that 1 kilo of nitrogen applied to the soil contributes to the pollution of the air by another 10 kilos equivalent of carbon dioxide.) That is to say, to produce and distribute and use fertilizer, all along the way you use fossil fuel – the one whose use you are trying to eliminate. I agree with the Professor: This is ridiculous!

But wrong assumption, Professor; wrong strategy too. You don’t have to fertilize your biofuel crop, or any crop for that matter. That’s exactly the reason I prefer sweet sorghum, because this crop grows well enough alone even without fertilizer. I have learned that this crop grows well most anywhere in fact, including waterlogged sites and marginal lands (try and check with icrisat.org) – so you don’t have to open forestlands for sweet sorghum plantations.

That’s not to mention that you don’t have to have thousands of hectares devoted solely to sweet sorghum. Farmers can plant a legume such as pigeon pea after sweet sorghum, to enrich the soil for the next crop. Farmers know relay cropping. Farmers can also mitigate the risks inherent in single-crop farming by growing several crops simultaneously to provide not only several sources of food and income but insurance against the failure of any crop arising from the attack of any pest or disease. Farmers know integrated pest management and multiple cropping.

When you grow crops for biofuel instead of food, this can cause food shortages (or food short circuits – my term). Professor Michel is correct. Surprise: Instead of growing the non-food biofuel crops, the Yankees insist on using corn as feedstock to manufacture ethanol, and the Brazilians insist on using sugarcane for their ethanol. Corn goes into the manufacture of thousands of consumer and industrial products; sugarcane goes into the manufacture of probably even more. Consider corn only, consider the multiplier effect of American cars eating American corn. What’s eating the Yankees?

Now, let’s think outside the box of corn.

Again, wrong assumption, Professor, and wrong strategy. I said, ‘When you grow crops for biofuel instead of food …’ why do you insist on using a food crop like corn or sugarcane to produce ethanol? In other words, you’re playing with fire when you use a food crop to produce biofuel for cars. You don’t need a food crop to produce alcohol, period; if you insist, you must be under the influence.

If you haven’t seen The Multiplier Effect, come visit the Philippines now (or, better yet, retire here): American corn becoming the US’ major source of ethanol has caused the increase in the prices of foods and related items not only in the United States but as far as in these Pearls of the Orient Seas, because we Filipinos eat American corn – we import our corn, joke or no joke, from the Yankees.

Would you believe? We import American corn for the birds and the bees – we feed our poultry with American corn, and of course the fastfood restaurant Jollibee – with its Bee mascot attending to each of the many branches worldwide – serves delicious chicken fed with delicious American corn.

It’s crazy. Roy Huckabay, Executive Vice President of the Linn Group, says, ‘When the energy markets went bananas over the last year, the value of corn as an energy source sky-rocketed.’ So, the consumers have to dig deeper into their pockets to pay the high prices of foods. This is stealing from the poor to give to the rich, Robin Hood in reverse. If you insist, you must be under the influence of the Sheriff of Nottingham.

Professor Michel is correct, according to my favorite brilliant Senator, Miriam Defensor-Santiago (January 15, Donna Pazzibugan & TJ Burgonio, newsinfo.inquirer.net). She says:

Biofuel is land-based and will eventually compete with food. Because the Philippines has a small land area, biofuel production will tend to encroach on food production. Corporations are already searching for millions of hectares for jatropha alone. We have to step on the brakes and decelerate.

Wrong assumption, Senator, and wrong strategy. You are allowing biofuel to compete with food – why should you? Even considering the high food prices, that corn for fuel competes with corn for food and feed is not an argument against bioethanol crops; rather, it is an argument against madness in using a food crop as a source of biofuel. That corporations are searching for millions of hectares for non-food-crop jatropha alone, which is for biodiesel, is not an argument against biodiesel crops either. No Ma’am, I know we have a tiny country, but the Biofuels Act does not raise a serious debate on food versus biofuels. Rather, it raises a serious debate on strategy for biofuel production. Because of the assumed biofuel strategy, biofuel is tragedy.

In the same Inquirer report, Parañaque Representative Roilo Golez says:

There seems to be a mad rush to develop biofuels. A lot of resources are being committed, including millions of hectares of land and billions of pesos, on something that is now being debated.

There is a mad rush, Sir, I agree with you, all over the world, including in the United States, which has continuously refused to acknowledge the wisdom of the Kyoto Protocol adopted in 1997, can you imagine that? Millions of hectares are being committed, but not in the Philippines. No one can commit millions of hectares to any crop (except rice) in the Philippines – we have only a few millions to begin with. Unless you are referring not to cultivated lands but forestlands to be cleared or deforested sites to be cleared anyway. To be committed to assigning those millions to jatropha alone, or to any biofuel crop for that matter, would be to be insane. To be or not to be, that is the question.

And Sir, biofuels is not something that is being debated (unless of course you’re listening to Professor Michel) – rather, it is which plants (crops or non-crops) to use as biofuels. Such as the source for ethanol: The Yankees prefer corn; the Brazilians prefer sugarcane; the Filipinos prefer sugarcane – Team ICRISAT prefers sweet sorghum. I prefer Team ICRISAT’s choice if you ask me. I have written about 25 full-length essays on this subject, all published by American Chronicle (for a quick view, read ‘My American Book. Embracing Science Embracing Faith’). Sweet sorghum is ‘a smart man’s choice of a poor man’s crop’ (frankahilario.com) because it need not compete with food crops for site or size; it needs little fertilizer; it needs little water; it needs little pesticide. All things considered, sweet sorghum is cheaper and better than the other crops raised for ethanol. Sweet sorghum makes sense out of nonsense.

So you see, Professor Michel, it’s all in the assumptions; it’s all in the approach, it’s all in the strategy.

In other words, the Professor is thinking only of one approach to the growing of any crop: mechanized, chemical agriculture. The farm machines gobble up gasoline or diesel (fossil fuels). The fertilizers you apply and the insecticides you spray against insect pests and herbicides against weeds are manufactured using loads of fossil fuels. You pump out gallons of water using gallons of fossil fuels. Mendoza (cited) says you need to pump about 10,000 liters of water to make 1 liter of ethanol. You are using your enemy to fight your enemy – so, the Professor is right; all the world’s a stage, and it is the theater of the absurd!

But there is another approach that our Nobel laureate has failed to mention in the growing of any crop: Small is beautiful. Didn’t German-British economist Ernest Schumacher teach us exactly that 35 years ago? Schumacher won my head and heart instantly. In homage, I named one of my sons after him. I’ve lost that son of mine, but I still remember him with fondness; I’ve lost my copy of Schumacher’s book, but I remember him kindly warning us against big machines in the big farms. (I’m glad Time listed him one of a hundred heroes of the last century.)

So I say, in the spirit of Schumacher: Small farms, small machines, big heads, big muscles. Less and less is more and more. So: Less and less fertilizers. Less and less insecticides. Less and less herbicides. Less and less water. (Not to mention less and less middlemen.) Even big business in biofuels can be small farms taken together. Proof of concept? The Rusni distillery producing ethanol from sweet sorghum is probably the world’s first in relying for feedstock on Indian farmers in village clusters in Andhra Pradesh, India (icrisat.org). Thousands of small farmers are planting sweet sorghum hybrids from ICRISAT; sweet sorghum as a biofuel crop is the work of Team ICRISAT, whose Team Captain is William Dar (see also my ‘The Color Yellow. Run, Al Gore, Run! (Run, ICRISAT, Run!’ americanchronicle.com).

The image (above) is to remind you that biofuel is not just in the numbers. It’s in the approach. In one approach, money is the incentive; in the other approach, more than money is the incentive. Whose side are you?

While I disagree with the Professor in his fragmented approach to solving the problem, I agree with him in his conclusion that there is global warming and so we better do something about it. He tells his Manila audience that ‘the Philippines is vulnerable to a rise in sea level and stronger storms as an offshoot of global warming’ (Burgonio as cited). So, ‘the Philippines has every reason to do everything to reduce the use of fossil energy.’ Yes, the Filipino is worth thinking outside the box for.

The Professor suggests that the Philippines tap other renewable energy sources to generate power. ‘The islands are rich in wind power. You should invest in wind to generate electricity.’ I appreciate the suggestion. In this, I like to think Professor Hartmut Michel is saying, in effect, if you sow the wind, you will harvest the whirlwind. And that makes an excellent energy source!

Nobody ever said ‘Biofuels alone.’ So, why not machines to harvest the wind and solar cells and sweet sorghum to harvest the sun? In Africa, Asia, South America. Then those harvests of seasons will be harvests of reason.

In the meantime, Manila remains the most polluted city in the world, and I’m referring only to atmosphere. Consider: 1 million cars smoking carbon dioxide into the very air you breathe. Consider: Smoking is bad for your health.

 

Sweet sorghum is sweet smart

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘The Smart Revolution. Ethanol Corn Or Sugarcane?
‘Sweet Sorghum Is Smart’ – William Dar, ICRISAT’

Sorghum makes a revolutionary theory: Smart! For biofuel, a paradigm shift from American corn to American sorghum, from Brazilian sugarcane to Brazilian sorghum, that’s smart. To make ethanol, corn is fine, sugarcane is sweet, but sweet sorghum is sweet smart.

‘Sweet sorghum is the smart crop,’ Director General William Dar of the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) says over lunch on broiled chicken, sinigang na maya-maya (sour soup, fish), tea and sugarcane juice somewhere in Quezon City, Philippines yesterday, January 11. ‘A smart crop’ – I wish I had thought of that.

And now Dar tells us, ‘Sweet sorghum is the smart crop. What we need to start the Smart Revolution is a smart crop.’ Now I’m thinking: If we’re as smart as we think we are.

Born January 11, The Smart Revolution advocates the enshrinement of pro-poor policies, among others. Sweet sorghum as source of ethanol is intelligent, not only because it is pro-poor. The Director General of ICRISAT enumerates 4 standards as his basis in saying sweet sorghum is a smart crop: food security, energy security, ecological sustainability, and water security. I write them down. He doesn’t explain; I have no questions. Let’s see if I’m as smart as I think I am:

Corn and sugarcane are food crops. The Yankees turn X amount of corn and the Brazilians Y amount of sugarcane into ethanol and they are denying X/Y quantities to the food manufacturers, who will (gladly) raise prices, and thereby punishing their customers by having to pay the price for a public policy that their peoples did not declare. They should be ashamed of themselves!

Sweet sorghum grain is food, but the yield in grains to a hectare is only about 4% of the yield in stalks, 4 tons to 92 tons/ha (Belum Reddy et al, ‘Sweet sorghum: A water-saving bio-energy crop,’ icrisat.org). To favor food and simplify, let me grant that the food yield of sweet sorghum is 10% and the stalk yield is 90% of the total harvest. Still, the ripple effect of the 10% is minimal, if visible at all. That reminds me of how the gifted Thomas Alva Edison defines genius: 10% inspiration and 90% perspiration. I don’t like it; too much work to do. So, I’ll take the 90% of sweet sorghum as my inspiration. A smart aleck, reversing Edison, I have been inspired to define genius as 90% inspiration and 10% perspiration. That should inspire others to help wage The Smart Revolution. Head first – assuming Heart – Hands later.

For a country to enjoy energy security, it will have to be self-sufficient and produce its own energy. For my country, since the Philippines has hardly any oil field, it means at least the fuel for cars and trucks must be tapped from crops, and the smart source for ethanol is sweet sorghum. What about the popular sweet crop, sugarcane? Okay, sweet sorghum is the smarter choice. It’s also sweeter, sweetheart.

Is it ecologically sustainable? Yes. Sweet sorghum can siphon off as much of the carbon dioxide in the air as sweet corn. The Ilocanos are a hardy people; they thrive anywhere. Like the Ilocanos of Northern Luzon in my country, sweet sorghum is resilient; so, it can reclaim and enrich marginal lands like corn or sugarcane cannot. Sweet sorghum is an intelligent solution to a problem soil. A crop for the sagacious farmer, not to mention the sagacious entrepreneur.

The cost of growing sweet sorghum is 4 times lower than that of sugarcane, P 17,820 compared to P 44,250/ha/year. Here, less is more, and that’s smart.

Crops need to drink water too. A favored crop in the Philippines, sugarcane doesn’t drink water – it gorges on it. For 1 crop of 12 months, sugarcane uses 36,000 cubic meters of water; for 2 crops of only 8-9 months, sweet sorghum sips only 8,000 cubic meters (Reddy et al, as cited). That’s 78% less water; in other words, sugarcane wolfs down 4.5 times more water than sweet sorghum. This is shocking news, at least to me, as my country has been cultivating sugarcane commercially since the 18th century under the Spanish regime; in the 19th century, sugarcane became a major export (Jose Maria T Zabala, fao.org). A historical lack of intelligence. So, we Filipinos have been cultivating for 200 years a crop that is a wastrel of water. This is water under the bridge we can stop if we’re smart enough.

Is the US smart enough to make a paradigm shift and make a sharp turn from corn to sweet sorghum? I doubt it. How about Brazil from sugarcane? As smart the United States, I guess.

Sweet sorghum is adaptable to many different sites. Flexible is smart.

While we are having lunch yesterday, I notice that the restaurant has ‘sugarcane juice’ and so we order a glass. It’s good. Dar comes up with an insight: That’s a good idea. Sweet sorghum juice is a good product. That’s what I call a smart customer.

Because it is soil-friendly, because it needs much less fertilizer, because of its multiple uses; and because a farmer can earn between $1,250 and $1,625 (at P40 to $1) (mixph.com), not peanuts in my country, now I can tell you: Sweet sorghum is a smart man’s choice of a poor man’s crop.

This is a multi-feedstock distillery, able to extract juice from not only sorghum but also sugarcane and corn. AR Palaniswamy, Managing Director of Rusni Distilleries says, ‘This ensures that we run the plant and provide employment to farmers throughout the year.’ A wise entrepreneur cultivates farmers.

GMA has since been supportive of sweet sorghum for ethanol production (see my ‘The Yankee Dawdle,’ americanchronicle.com). Smart President of her country.

The centerpiece of the conference is the setting up of what is to be called the National Sweet Sorghum Research and Development Center. R&D: I’m not happy to note that the name does not exactly fit the framework; there’s an important letter missing. The image I show (above) is to remind people to please not forget the art & science of Extension; E should always follow R&D. Not only that. Consider that E today must include KM (knowledge management) – you have to sell theory so that practice will follow. Science is swell if you can sell well.

Related to Extension, there’s another E that I think should be integrated into any framework for a national sweet sorghum institute: Entrepreneurship. In cultivating sweet sorghum, entrepreneurship should also be cultivated among Filipinos, in either of two ways: (1) Encouraging the big businessmen to put up their ethanol distillery plants and encouraging the surrounding farms to supply the sweet sorghum stalks on a continuing basis. (2) Encouraging small farmers out of reach of a distillery to collaborate and build village-scale sweet sorghum-based industries such as for syrup, jaggery, wine, feed, food, fuel, fertilizer. Small is smart.

Strategic issues to be addressed in the conference involve, in my own words: (a) production, (b) processing, (c) people, (d) public-private partnerships. I note that the title of the conference has the phrase review and planning. Good thinking. I also think that based on the range of issues listed to be discussed, the review is designed to be holistic, starting with the seeds and ending with what happens to the harvest, what are the benefits and who gets what. If you’re broad-minded, you don’t ever forget the distribution of benefits.

All in all, I am convinced sweet sorghum is The Smart Crop, the great climate change crop. So, I say the smart set are the Filipinos and other Asians, the Europeans, Africans, North and South Americans and others who are paying attention to climate change following the Kyoto Protocol (see also my ‘Atlas Blogged! Climate Change In UK, Then In UP, Then In US?’ americanchronicle.com). To those who have been intelligently accepting the Kyoto Protocol, I say:

Sweet sorghum is smart money.

Sorghum makes a radical tease: Smart. Now, for the rest of us, which one are you: Smart cookie, smart mouth, or smart ass? Those who have been foolishly rejecting the Kyoto Protocol, the peoples of the United States and Australia, to them I ask:

While you’re so rich, why aren’t you so smart?

You can’t write if you’re a dummy

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘My Crazy Dozen. The Rebel Writer’s Guide For Non-Dummies’

Who am I talking to this time? They would be public speakers, lecturers, PowerPoint presentors, resource persons, debaters, reviewers, essayists, biographers, autobiographers, authors, ghostwriters, columnists, journalists, consultants, managers, even proposal packagers in science. And why is that? All of them must be good writers first before they can be good at what they’re supposed to be doing. Those who can afford can hire good writers, so I’m not writing for those dummies.

The non-dummy reason I will not write a dummies’ book for writers is that you can’t write if you’re a dummy.

A dummy is certainly not educated on the subject – but why educate him on the history, comparison and technical details of Windows when all he wants to know and do is run Windows to write a letter and send it via email?

Dan Brown reports that his book Da Vinci Code has sold 70 million copies worldwide (danbrown.com); multiply that by 2 readers a copy and you have 140 million dummies worldwide.

To balance that a bit, Time reports that JK Rowling’s 7 Harry Potter books have sold 400 million copies worldwide. Multiply that number by 2.5 readers a copy and you have 1 billion dummies. Count me in. I’m unique; I’m a one-in-a-billion dummy.

That’s how science should be told, like magic – science is magic.

This world has gone to the dummies!

The Attorney General has determined that gambling is bad for your health.

From what I’ve seen so far, you’re a dummy if you buy a book for dummies – they’re for professionals, who I would believe are no dummies.

There’s no such thing as ‘a perfect blogger’ – I’m an inveterate blogger and I’m not always perfect.

WordPress is not that smart, and I’m not that dummy.

There’s no such thing as a free lunch – only a free hunch.

In other words, ‘for dummies’ is all hype, and you’re a dog if you dig it, you’re a zombie if you yearn for it, you’re a fool if you pine for it, you’re a puppy if you lap it all up.

Hacking is for crazy whiz kids or insane virtuosos, not dummies like you and me. In this case, I like being a dummy.

The idea of a brainstorm is that you have absolutely no idea!

My Crazy Twelve Commandments Of Writing For Non-Dummies

(1) If you want to begin right, don’t begin right.
(2) If you want to create order, create disorder.
(3) If you want to write well, don’t write.
(4) If you want to be read, don’t read yourself.
(5) If you want to listen to advice, don’t give the advice.
(6) If you want to attract readers, don’t give your vocabulary.
(7) If you want to improve, don’t just improve.
(8) If you want to get more ideas, look where there are none!
(9) If you want to have a good sequence, make a bad one.
(10) If you want to write objectively, you’re a journalist.
(11) If you want to know everything, you’re an encyclopedia.
(12) If you want to give up, you’re a mad genius!

Later, from out of the chaos, I can hear myself say, ‘Let there be life!’ And there is like. And it is enough.

The ideas and information I got from the Internet challenged me, set me in other directions, and otherwise helped me think some more and come up with my own order of thoughts. It wasn’t easy, but then again I’ve had years and years of practice so much so that the pressure has become pleasure. You should be so pleased!

That first paragraph is information overload, too much even for a professional reader. It reads like an ad copy written by Bill Gates himself. Bill Gates is great in marketing, not in copy.

If you believe you have all the wisdom, you’re not real; you don’t exist. End of story.

Contrary to what Dale Carnegie may have said, vocabulary scares people.

That’s why I say science writing is too important a subject to be left to scientists alone.

The Rebel Writer has determined that a wide vocabulary is bad for your health.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholden.

WordPress is not the only blog pusher in the world.

I was a barbarian knocking at the gates for more ideas. Heaven knows I don’t have to be a barbarian but it helps.

Impressions are important: Impressions first, impressions last.

When in Rome, don’t write like the Romans do. Unless I’m sadly mistaken, all journalists try to write objectively – and that explains why they are boring to read.

Your readers are not objective themselves – they root for people, sides, causes. No, you’re a double dummy if you try to write for all kinds of people – you can only write for your kind of dummies, dummy.

Not knowing is a perfect reason for knowing more!

Today, being a writer is easy – talent or no talent, you create a blog and in a minute or two, you’re a published writer.

You’d be mad to give up a high regard for yourself, or your ambition – but you’d be a genius as a writer.

I can share with you that the more you are at peace with the world, the better you become as a writer, not to mention as a human being.

Why now do I write? I want to share my experiences and insights in living and hope to encourage others. Why now do I write for writers? I want to share my experiences and insights in writing and hope to encourage writers to encourage others.

There is so much negative in the Philippines today that to encourage the positive requires that you invest on heroism that of course is a huge risk since it borders on stupidity.

The Philippines needs more geniuses who are foolish enough to give up their comfort zones in favor of their country, to give up their ambitions for themselves. I’m hoping that more such insane geniuses will rise among Filipinos, especially writers young and old – the old, for their own legacy; the young, for own their future. Give up and be recognized!

As for me, I’ve given up on UP, the University of the Philippines, my alma mater; I’ve given up on the fervent UP nationalist geniuses. These are the times for globalization; now, nationalism is local, internationalism is global and the irresistible force.

Age doesn’t matter; you can be a genius at 8, 18, 38, 68, 78, 88, 98? A silly genius for the environment. A crazy genius for God and country. A hero. To be a hero, I suppose you shouldn’t have to be ridiculous but it should help.

I write to probe

Selections from my Franciscan essays (hover cursor over link for source or click for full article)
‘100 in 100. Celebrating Centennials & Counting’

I Francisco have written 100 Franciscan essays published online by the American Chronicle in the last 100 weeks, from February 2006 to December 2007. I didn’t count before, but those 100 now make me feel I count a lot.

In journalism, you write 30 and you’re finished; in science writing, I write 100 and I’ve just began.

100 essays I wrote; what was I trying to prove? Nothing. I don’t write to prove; rather, I write to probe. And if you ask me, those 100 prove that my probing is worth approving.

There are no dull science stories, only dull science writers.

Since Word 2007 is entirely new, I have to forget everything I have learned about Word 2003. I’d rather forget Word 2007.

I have 100 reasons why I call sweet sorghum, which scientists prefer to call Sorghum bicolor, the great climate change crop (see my ‘My American Book,’ americanchronicle.com). The #1 reason: Sweet sorghum grows rich on poor soils. It can withstand waterlogging on one hand and drought on the other. Scientists should call it Sorghum versatile.

I have always been open-minded about my writing, but publishers have not agreed with me. So I see: The problem with writing is not writing but publishing – that you’ve got talent is not a guarantee that you’ll get published.

As against page publishing that the newspapers and magazines delight in, or book publishing that textbook publishers enjoy, blogging has given me the pleasure of thought publishing (and the inspiration to coin a new term). Blogging is the biggest thing since the printing press. Blogging is the best thing that ever happened since blabbering.

I told you 100 is perfect! And so, like George Burns and Bob Hope and your mother or grandmother, I’d be glad to live to be 100 years old but, God, 87 is good enough for me.

I’m grateful for people who are grateful.

Having learned to be creative more than 40 years ago with Rudolf Flesch’s pocketbook How To Write, Think & Speak More Effectively, I can relate even two opposites and find some pleasant things to talk and think about.

I have reason enough for my faith, and I have faith enough in my reason.

A science story does not have to be drab.

Get personal. Imagine that you are taking part in a conversation, so you write as if you’re talking to someone in particular. That will make your writing more natural and, therefore, more appealing. Also, remember always to take sides; that way, you gain credibility.

Money speaks louder than words.

At any rate, the exact date is not important: We celebrate the event, not the number. We celebrate the centennial, the growing of age, not the age. We hold on to the process, not the product.

A double centennial? 100 happening in 100: The pleasure had been mine.