We’ve always balked at the biggest and most important change of all – reclaiming the identity of our archipelago of over 7,000 islands from that of the Spanish king it was named after
It seems no other news platform but Rappler, as far as I know, carried Rep. Dan Fernandez’s lengthy talk about the legendary city of Ophir.
Why did most of the media ignore it? Because it was unimportant, insignificant in the greater scheme of things — or just too bizarre?
Last July 31, Fernandez took advantage of the Lower House’s ‘privilege hour’ to deliver a 24-minute speech in which he claimed the Philippines was no other than Ophir, a land mentioned in the Bible that was rich in gold, ivory, peacocks, and apes.
He cherry-picked from various sources, including the Bible, to prove his point.
The congressperson has been derided by netizens for his offbeat views, but supported by the like-minded, who tag their comments with #OphirNotPhilippines and call themselves “Ophirians.” (They have their own jargon rife with religious terminology.)
The point of Fernandez’s speech was to call for a change of our nation’s name from “the Philippines,” which he rightly said was a colonial imposition.
He shared a video that portrayed Spanish and American atrocities to support his argument. Naming or renaming something, after all, whether a puppy or a country, is an assertion of ownership, dominion, and authority.
But to change ‘the Philippines’ to ‘Ophir,’ as he suggested, and to accept his claims that Ophir is no other than the Philippines, is plain bonkers because there is no evidence that proves conclusively that our archipelago is indeed this land.
Archaeological studies have shown no such proof, as explained by Filipino Xiao Chua and Fil-American historian Kirby Araullo in their posts on the internet.
I’ve written at least twice previously, in 2013 and 2019, about changing the name of the Philippines to cast off the reminders of colonization. In this I agree with Fernandez, that it’s a move that’s long overdue.
We’ve already made moves to decolonize place names in the country, when street names were changed – for instance, Calle Anloague to Juan Luna Street, or Calle Azcarraga to Recto Avenue.
But. we’ve always balked at the biggest and most important change of all – reclaiming the identity of our archipelago of over 7,000 islands from that of the Spanish king it was named after
Political scientist Nathan Gilbert Quimpo wrote in an excellent essay: “From their very origins then, Philippines and Filipino are colonial names, and as such, are contradictory to the term nationalism.
“Simply on the basis of the colonial roots of Philippines, it can already be argued that the country’s name should be changed.
“Indeed, many former colonies have discarded their colonial appellations and adopted titles that are of more indigenous or un–colonial derivation: Burkina Faso, Namibia, Sri Lanka, Uruguay, Vanuatu, and Zimbabwe.”
Likewise, many people in New Zealand are increasingly using its Maori name – Aotearoa – and have pushed for identifying and restoring Maori place names all over the country.
These are just some examples of how decolonization is being manifested by some formerly colonized countries.
Reclaiming, reshaping, or refreshing a nation’s identity by using an indigenous name or one untainted by colonial associations is a tangible means for the people of that nation to assert their ownership of their homeland and move forward without the oppressive reminders of the past.
Proposals to decolonize our own country’s name have been made in the past, notably by former presidents Marcos Sr. and Duterte.
In 2017, Magdalo Rep. Gary Alejano filed a bill proposing the creation of a commission to rename the country. The bill hasn’t been heard of since.
“If we want to be truly independent,” Alejano said, “then we should throw away the bonds of colonialism by establishing our own national identity. For our country to move forward, we should identify a name for our country that genuinely reflects our national aspirations, a name that signifies our values and self-determination.”
As I’ve said before, probably the reason such a notion hasn’t caught on is that no one has thought of a catchy enough name that will be accepted by all sectors of society.
And Ophir certainly ain’t it.
* * *
Lawyer and visual artist Joy Rojas (professionally known as Jose Ferdinand M. Rojas II) will once more regale art aficionados with his expressions of abstraction in his upcoming solo show ‘What are the Lines that Define You?’ on August 11 at ArtistSpace, Ayala Museum Annex.
His latest set of paintings showcases an experimental approach to color, abstract shapes, and texture, using historical imagery, landscapes, and elements from the natural world to evoke emotion and provoke thought.
This is Rojas’ seventh solo show.
The most recent was last year’s ‘The Journey Continues,’ which was the inaugural event at the newly renovated Ayala Museum’s ArtistSpace.
* * * FB and Twitter: @DrJennyO / Email: [email protected]