In the Claws of Brightness (Sa mga Kuko ng Liwanag) by Edgardo M. Reyes: In a Marxist Perspective
The
idea of repression, manipulation, alienation and class struggle are
evident in the story written by Edgardo M. Reyes. It gives us an idea
of materialism present in the authentic society we are part of. It
also mirrors that people in this world, regardless of any community,
are not spiritual beings but socially constructed ones. We are not
products of divine design but creations of our own cultural and
social circumstances (Dobie 84). What define us are not our
philosophical and religious beliefs but our capability to adapt to
this “material world”.
In
this story, Reyes tries to expose the reality of the real world
especially in the social context he had chosen, which is a clear
manifestation of a social institution according to Marxists. Marxism,
as a type of literary criticism formulated by the ideologies of Karl
Marx, with the help of Freidrich Engels, generally
view literature "not as works created in accordance with
timeless artistic criteria, but as 'products' of the economic and
ideological determinants" (Abrams 149).
Reyes, through his work, illustrates the system of the society on how
the distribution of economic power undergirds the society.
The
class conflict is evident in the story. Struggles between classes are
not only prevalent but also the inner struggle between the classes
itself. The powerful against the incapable is represented in the
story which was successfully embellished through the choice of
characters and their characterization.
A
man itself who experiences poverty will try to lift himself to have a
“change”. The “change” that a man is hoping (who experiences
the problem which is a product of class struggle) try to overcome the
contradiction from what is dictated by the society from who can
afford and not. At the situation in the story where Ligaya tried to
find a greener pasture to earn more money, the class conflict has
already started (Reyes 110). It mirrors the idea of people trying to
be one of the higher socioeconomic classes. Therefore creates an
ideology that they can have a better life when they are in Manila,
the capital city (Reyes 13). People have the notion that when you are
in the capital city, you are well off of the material things in this
world, but that is not also true to nature. The construction workers
in the story are clear examples of how people fall in this ideology.
Another
example is the ideology of Imo. He works hard in La Madrid
Construction Company to support his education (Reyes 40-41). This is
also a clear example of how people want to be in a higher
socioeconomic class. They work hard to get a degree so to elevate
their social status. Again, it is the society that molds one’s
thinking. The society dictates the standards of social ranks which
Marxists contradict.
Repression
is a concept of a dominating class oppressing the classless group of
the society. It is an act associated by manipulation of the workers
in a community. Wage earners are good examples of the “manipulated
class” and the capitalists who make benefits out of them are the
“manipulators”.
The
author gives a complete power to Mr. Balajadia to control his people.
His character is parallel to tyrants who make their own rules and who
break their own-made policies. The holistic decision depends upon on
how they squeeze the dew of the fruits. For example, in the part
where Atom accidentally broke a porcelain soap dish (Reyes 72), Atong
finds Mr. Balajadia sarcastically kind not to respond rudely from the
damaged he did. However, when Mr. Balajadia was about to give their
salary, Atong was charged with the damage he did. Not to mention, his
remaining salary that was not given to him yet, since he started
working there, was not also granted. The payment of the damage he did
in the construction site is a demonstration of manipulation. It is a
clear indication of how bourgeoisie (the upper class people) maneuver
the proletariat (the working class). Since the proletariat believes
that they can do nothing against them, they just accepted the fact
that they are just treated as second citizens, and therefore not
allowed to contradict the decisions of those in the upper class. It
was clearly stated on page 62 of the book that Atong just accepted
the false consciousness that they cannot do something about the
current situation. This idea is also supported in the part where
Perla did not have the courage to fight for his brother, Atong, who
was a victim of injustice. She believed in what other people say that
they cannot go against the status quo of the society because if she
does so, a bigger trouble might happen. In these examples, it is
clear that the proletariat accepted the unfavorable social system
without protests or questioning, that is, as the logical way for
things to be (Dobie 92). The hegemony (the
processes by which dominant culture maintains its dominant position;
Felluga) of
the bourgeoisie continues to rule the people in the working class,
not because they have the power to manipulate them, but because the
proletariat itself, accepted the ideology that the society has
dictated. No one tries to break the rule.
Manipulation
in this case makes the dominant class be in command of the
“superstructure”. They are able to control the members of the
working class by the extension of their wealth. It gives us the idea
of the economic system that molds the society creating a set of
social, political and ideological systems and institutions it
generates—considering the values, art and legal processes known as
the superstructure (Dobie 83). One great example of this is when
Atong was telling Julio about the reason why his father was paralyzed
(Reyes 29). He said that they once owned a land somewhere in Quezon
City when a man named Giazon, took it. He did not know how powerful
this man was. Since his father believed that it was theirs, he fought
against him. Eventually, by the use of power and wealth, a henchman
of this millionaire shot his father causing his father to be
paralyzed. This scene depicts the how the hegemony of the upper class
(Giazon) dominates those in the lower class.
Alienation
is also evident in the story. The proletariats are working for a low
salary. They receive less, more than of what they should get (Reyes
11). They receive a payment just enough to sustain their expenses
going back to work for the next day. This is an indication of
exploitation of their skills as blue collar workers. The author
represented the blue collar workers through the characters of Julio,
Imo, Atong, Omeng, Benny, Frank, Gido and other construction workers.
It is merely a depiction of interpellation which is to accept the
ideology of the dominant class (Dobie 92). Commodification is also
present in this sense, where workers
are not treated as human beings that need proper demands. Their value
is utilized in a different way which is not in favor with them.
Moreover,
the proletariat who work for one day necessity also experience a lot
of struggles when it comes to ratification of their responsibilities
from their “boss”. It is prevalent that the free market economy
where in businessmen or entrepreneurs competes with themselves,
result to marginalization of the “less affording class”. It
became a leeway for them to benefit from the needy citizens of the
society that leads to making profits out of them. The bourgeoisie,
people categorized as the “middle class”, capable of running a
business and managing wage earners were represented in the story
through the two of the characters namely Mr. Balajadia and Ah Tek.
Capitalism
makes a linear division between those people who can own a property
from those who can’t afford to earn more than of the wage that they
need for a day. It is a clear representation in the story that Mr.
Balajadia earns the capital back from his false management to his
workers in the construction site.
In
conclusion, Marxists believe that the bourgeoisie take advantage of
the proletariat while the proletariat have no idea that they are
being exploited. In order to change the nasty cycle, the class system
should be defeated. Julio and Atong could be considered the Marxists
in the story, because they stood against the authority of the upper
classes, and realized that they were under a false consciousness.
When Atong attacked Mr. Balajadia and was supposed to kill him, is a
concrete example of how a proletariat goes against the status quo.
Another example is when Julio killed Ah Tek for being unjust to
Ligaya. Both the characters represent Marxist in this sense. They
believed that the injustice ruling should put to an end.
Reyes’s
story, “Sa Mga Kuko ng Liwanag”, is a great example of how should
reader fight for their rights. It is a way to educate people to go
against the bias standards of the society. Reyes, through his book,
is successful in reminding people that they have the privileges to
fight for their civil rights.
WORKS
CITED
Dobie, Anne B. Theory into Practice. Third ed. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Web. 22 Sept. 2014.
Reyes,
Edgar. Sa
Mga Kuko Ng Liwanag.
Manila: De La Salle UP, 1986. Print.
Felluga,
Dino. "Marxism: Terms." Introduction
to Marxism.
N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Sept. 2014.
%2Bbluray%2Bhd%2B720p%2B%2Bfree%2Bdownload.jpg)
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento