Building on the successes of conferences honoring the late Edel Garcellano in 2018, 2019, and 2023, we organized a fourth iteration aimed at preserving his legacy as PUP’s foremost literary critic, poet, and scholar.

This year’s theme diverged from the earlier focus on literary and cultural studies, but the shift toward exploring PUP’s broader literary and intellectual history remains deeply aligned with Edel Garcellano’s impact on the university’s landscape. This initiative sought to spotlight the contributions of PUP thinkers and writers, including those who intersected with his academic journey—who he had known, debated with, or influenced.  

The plan, through the pioneering efforts of PUP’s Institute of Social History, is to document and critically examine the rich intellectual tradition of the “Sintang Paaralan”—an endeavor that remains both timely and necessary.

The conference was made possible through the collaborative efforts of PUP and the National Research Council of the Philippines (NRCP) officials, alongside key institutional units, including the PUP Research Institute for Culture and Language, the Center for Creative Writing (CCW), and the Center for Philippine Studies (CPS), in partnership with the NRCP Humanities Division, as well as the support of Edel Garcellano’s family. 

Research production

After a series of productive meetings with the NRCP Humanities Division to finalize the event details, we set our sights on fostering a deeper research culture and mentorship, primarily aimed at encouraging PUP faculty to actively engage in research production while also promoting membership in the NRCP Humanities Division.

These efforts culminated in the 4th Edel Garcellano Conference on Philippine Studies and Intellectual History, held last Nov. 12 at the PUP Theatre in the College of Communication Building, PUP Sta. Mesa, Manila. 

The conference offered a full day of insightful discussions, featuring a keynote address, a plenary talk, and research presentations alongside conversations, with hybrid sessions also conducted via Zoom.

The scholars Dr. Romeo P. Peña and Dr. Charlie S. Veric discussed their perspectives on Philippine Studies. 

Peña delivered the keynote address titled “Ang PUP, ang Social History, at si Edel Garcellano,” which traced the establishment of the PUP Center for Social History and the influences of Edel Garcellano. In his own paper titled “How the US Invented Filipinization: 1898-1946,” Veric examined the impact of US colonialism on Filipino identity formation. 

The conference also honored the outstanding contributions of PUP faculty, staff, and students with the PUP Literary Incentives Award, a recognition to foster excellence in literary production and research.  

Insight and collaboration

Key sessions showcasing research by PUP faculty were central to the conference’s program, enriched by insight from NRCP Humanities Division rapporteurs. These discussions spanned diverse topics. 

Prof. Jomar G. Adaya’s paper, “Mula Institute of Social History Patungong Center for Philippine Studies: Ilang Tala sa Kasaysayan ng Sentrong Pampananaliksik ng PUP” traced the origin and depth of CPS as a research center and was guided by comments from Veric.

Prof. Lenin Carlos M. Mirasol’s discussion on “Si Dominador B. Mirasol at Ang Utopya sa Agos ng Kanyang mga Katha, 1960s – 1998” received thoughtful feedback from Dr. Ma. Crisanta Nelmida. 

Prof. MJ Rafal paper, “Realismo Bilang Utopya: Ang Kaso ng ‘Buhawi’ ni Rogelio L. Ordoñez,” an analysis of the author’s work, was further refined by comments from Dr. Louie Jon A. Sanchez.

The anthology “Mga Agos sa Disyerto,” which featured the socially relevant works of Dominador Mirasol and Rogelio Ordoñez, marked a turning point in Philippine literature. In various ways, their works shaped the literary tradition and left a lasting influence on today’s generation of PUP writers.

Adding to the discourse, Prof. John Paolo Sarce explored the intersection of soundscapes and gender in “The Soundscape in City: Constructing Philippine Cities through Sound and Music in Cuenca’s Night Music and Song of the Black Opal.” Dr. Joyce L. Arriola provided recommendations for further development.  

Prof. Marvin M. Lobos presented his work, “Si Rogelio L. Ordoñez at ang PUP – Linangan sa Paggawa at Ugnayang Industriyal: Paunang Tala sa Kasaysayang Intelektuwal ng Politeknikong Unibersidad ng Pilipinas bilang Pamantasan ng Uring Anakpawis,” and Prof. Rosemarie O. Roque introduced the potential of documentary theater in her paper, “Breaking Ground: Introducing Documentary Theater as a Creative Practice at PUP.” The two presentations received insightful critiques from Dr. Glecy C. Atienza.

This conference emphasized conversations with PUP faculty members, aimed at helping them navigate their academic trajectories and address gaps in fields that remain underexplored. 

The collaboration, which also marked the beginning of a sustained effort to enrich the university’s research culture, will continue to grow and deepen as the research projects presented evolve into published works.

Looking ahead 

As the CCW chief, Prof. Merdeka “Dekki” Morales, often emphasized in our conversations, there is a pressing need to dedicate effort to studying the lives and contributions of PUP’s scholars, particularly women writers and revolutionary martyrs, who have profoundly shaped the university’s identity and ethos.  

Too often overlooked, these individuals play a pivotal role in PUP’s history and the broader cultural narrative—something students and the next generation ought to study and appreciate.  

These lines from Edel Garcellano on writing and reading and the ways by which we navigate our chosen paths are a constant reminder of the responsibility of politically committed writing: “Delikado ba ang mga sinusulat mo? Ang mga binabasa mo? Kung sirkero ka at nadulas ka habang naglalakad sa alambre, malalaglag ka ba diretso sa lupa o may safety net na sasalo sa ‘yo?”

They strike a deep chord in me: a call to be resolute in our writing, and to realize that there is much work to be done. 

In looking ahead, the CCW is committed to once more build on the success of this year’s conference. Anchored on the enduring legacy of Edel Garcellano and PUP’s literary and intellectual history, the conference series promises to remain vibrant for the years to come.

Jenna Dolovino is a media correspondent for Manila Today and a staff member of the PUP Center for Creative Writing. She graduated magna cum laude with a degree in sociology and nurtures a passion for creating zines that highlight the experiences of women and workers.

Read more: The crisis in Philippine education began 120 years ago

The post Timely and necessary conversations appeared first on CoverStory.

More than a month since the University of the Philippines (UP) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) signed a “declaration of cooperation” (DOC) to conduct joint strategic research, and even before the first research topic was announced, the University Council (UC) of UP Diliman put its foot down on the accord.

In a statement issued on Sept. 25, the university’s highest academic policymaking body composed of professors of all ranks of the largest unit in the UP System called the DOC an “assault on the independence of our university and on academic freedom.”

“We challenge President Angelo A. Jimenez to show his wisdom and faithfulness to the university’s mandate by nullifying the declaration of cooperation with the AFP,” it said. (See https://tinyurl.com/24drvsj8)

In an interview on Oct. 7 with CoverStory.ph, Jimenez gave no sign that he would back down, but said he was still open to dialogue with various sectors in UP.  He said the university should “never fear to engage.”  

The UC said the university administration committed the entire UP System to working with the AFP without prior consultation with its constituents despite the military’s decades-long adversarial stance toward UP.

It said the DOC “whitewashes the escalating repression in UP and other educational institutions” which had been done through Red-tagging, enforced disappearances and harassment of student, faculty and staff leaders.

“A declaration of cooperation sends all the wrong messages: that UP can serve as a think tank for the military and that the goals of UP and the AFP can be in ‘strategic alignment,’” the UC said. “Militarization is fundamentally incompatible with a free public university.”

The UC statement was prepared in time for the Sept. 26 meeting of the 11-member Board of Regents (BOR), the university’s main policymaking body.

Caught by surprise

Faculty regent Carl Marc Ramota, an assistant professor of political science at UP Manila and former chair of All UP Academic Employees Union, said the university was caught by surprise because the DOC was made public by the AFP on Aug. 8, ahead of an official announcement by UP.

Ramota said that during a BOR meeting on Aug. 30, he raised the DOC as a “policy question,” and the regents recommended further discussions with UP constituents.

The UP authorities should listen to the University Council, he said, adding: “At the end of the day, the university is an academic institution.”

During a dialogue on Sept. 16 between representatives of various student, faculty and staff organizations, and Jimenez and other university officials, the administration made no commitment to rescind the declaration, insisting that “the document remained sound,” according to Ramota.

In a statement on Sept. 26, the UP administration indicated that it was unmoved by the UC’s position.

While it reiterated that the DOC was “non-binding and exploratory,” it said the arrangement would also be “beneficial precisely because it provides a framework for the University to share its knowledge and expertise towards contributing to the broader advocacy for security sector reform in our country.”

The DOC is intended to “provide a framework for cooperation between the AFP and UP in order to foster the development of possible collaborative projects and activities in the field of strategic studies through research, publication, training,” and conferences and visits.

The research projects would be jointly conducted by the UP Center for Integrative and Development Studies (UP CIDS) and the AFP’s Office of Strategic Studies and Strategy Management (OSSSM).

Each side could solicit articles for publication in either the Philippine Journal of Public Policy of the CIDS or the Quarterly Digest of the OSSSM.

‘Based on fear’

Speaking with CoverStory.ph, Jimenez said the opposition to the DOC is “based on fear,” which he granted has some roots in “history.”

But he does not want UP “to move based on fear,” he said. “I want us to move based on our commitment, our courage.” 

Jimenez also said the university cannot not “engage” with the military as both UP and the AFP are public institutions. “We will not engage out of fear, but we should never fear to engage,” he said. “And it is UP’s opportunity to influence the thinking of a national security establishment.” 

Being openly engaged with other institutions but not with the military is “unjustified exceptionalism,” according to Jimenez. He cited the difference between the institution and individual acts committed by its people—or between the AFP and human rights violations by particular soldiers and officers.

Dr. Leo Cubillan, UP vice president for academic affairs who signed the DOC on behalf of Jimenez, told CoverStory that there was no need to consult “everyone” as those who would be involved in the research are the experts from CIDS and OSSSM.

“There’s always independence and autonomy in terms of research content. Hindi talaga po siya kasama sa consultation (That’s really not included in the consultation),” Cubillan said.

But for policymaking, all stakeholders would have to be consulted, he said.

He explained that since CIDS is directly under the UP System, and not a part of a particular UP unit like Diliman, such an agreement would have to be approved and signed by the UP president himself as the top official of the entire university.

Cubillan, an ophthalmologist who was deputy director of the National Institutes of Health, said the DOC is a broad memorandum of understanding, one of over 350 between UP and other entities, including those abroad.

Specific research would have to be governed by a memorandum of agreement. If one side disagrees with the terms, no research will be possible, he said.

‘Common practice’

Such joint university-military research projects are a “common practice” especially in the United States, between the Pentagon and top schools like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard University, according to Temario Rivera, the late retired chair of UP’s Department of Political Science who headed the Center for People Empowerment in Governance.

“In our case, it is not as prominent because in the past, perhaps, there was no necessity,” Rivera said in an interview with CoverStory about a month before his death on Sept. 18.

He acknowledged that “the elephant in the room is the perception that the military is an oppressive institution,” which complicates the possibility of engagement.

Rivera, an activist teacher who was incarcerated for five years during the Marcos martial law regime, said that “in theory and practice, there is no reason why UP should not engage the military in these kinds of activities, especially if we see that they could help the country.”

He proposed two immediate research topics—the South China Sea conflict and the resolution of the more-than-half-a-century-old communist insurgency.

“Isn’t that very important? In fact, we should influence the military that they should not be stuck with a military-driven response to the [maritime] crisis,” Rivera said.

He said UP could make a very important contribution to the peace process: Its “comparative research insights” on its success in other countries, but not in the Philippines, would be very helpful to the resolution of the armed conflict.

For the military, the peace process is not urgent, according to Rivera. “That is another reason why we should impress on them the urgency of research on the peace process because how can we effectively respond to an external threat if an internal threat remains on the ground?” he said. To achieve a “unified national response” to an external threat, he added, “we should find a way to finally resolve” the insurgency problem.

Insensitivity

Sylvia Estrada Claudio, a professor emerita of UP Diliman who has a PhD in psychology, said that as a national university, UP should provide expertise for the national good.

The former dean of the UP College of Social Work and Community Development, who is also a medical doctor and outspoken feminist, welcomes policymakers who listen to experts in making plans and programs. But what bothers her about the DOC is that “it doesn’t have sensitivity” to the history of UP and its “difficult relationship” with the military.

Claudio is particularly piqued by the lack of consultation with the UP community prior to the making of the declaration. Those involved in crafting the DOC did not realize that it would be difficult to implement after skipping that process, she said.

The document itself is “innocuous” except for the clause that keeps everything confidential. “But you don’t sign a piece of paper like that without paying attention to the context of the two institutions,” she said. “We have been angry with each other for decades, we have been adversarial for decades, and suddenly we agree to research together when battle lines are still drawn?”

Claudio supports a “productive dialogue” with the military, but within the proper historical context.

“We do want that,” she said. “But if you ignore the context, the issues at hand, the deep resentment of large sections of the university with the military that goes back to 50 years or more, how can you say that you made an agreement that would start a productive dialogue?”

In its statement on Sept. 26, the UP administration said it was taking “the sentiments of the University Council of Diliman into serious consideration as we work on potential areas of critical collaboration with the peace and development sector that will ensure the primacy of human rights and academic freedom.”

The University Councils of the other UP units have not yet responded to this issue.

Both substance and optics

Sol Iglesias, assistant professor of political science, expressed the concern of the UP faculty about “both the substance and the optics” of the DOC, saying it could be interpreted as “turning a blind eye” to human rights violations by the military that had “disproportionately targeted” UP over the years.

“There’s not even a word of general concern over human rights,” Iglesias said. “This agreement has probably fewer benefits to the university than it has to sort of burnish the image and reputation of the AFP. It looks like rapprochement.”

In their statement, the UC members said they have nothing against faculty and scholars engaging with private or public entities as individuals, and that the military is free to access the university’s publicly available research products.

These individual research initiatives are “well-defined in scope” and do not need a “broad declaration of institutional cooperation,” the UC members said.

Iglesias said that if UP does not withdraw from the DOC, ethical questions would arise concerning UP-AFP research projects, given all the issues raised against it.

Julius Lustro, assistant professor of mechanical engineering and fluid mechanics, said the DOC is unheard of.

“Where in the world have we seen a university, which takes pride in its tradition of academic freedom and social criticism, sign a ‘declaration of cooperation’ with the military?” Lustro said in a statement during a press conference following the disclosure of the DOC.

Literature and creative writing professor Rommel Rodriguez, who has been Red-tagged, denounced Jimenez for “betraying the long history and tradition” of UP as an academic institution that advances human rights and academic freedom, as well as the cloud of secrecy over the DOC.

“Is this scholarship or intelligence work?” Rodriguez said. “Is this for the interest of the UP community or the AFP?”

Journalism professor Danilo Arao expressed doubts over the quality of scholarship that the AFP could contribute to any joint research with the UP.

“If the institution is a purveyor of disinformation, how can you expect genuine scholarship to happen?” Arao said.

At the time the University Council of UP Diliman issued its statement against the DOC, more than 1,300 people had already signed a petition demanding that Jimenez withdraw from the declaration. The petition-signing has continued, with 1,371 signatories so far, according to Rodriguez.

Read more: Sure, let’s discuss so-called ‘grade inflation’

The post UP admin and University Council still at odds on UP-AFP accord appeared first on CoverStory.

Nearly half, or 13, of the more than 30 rafflesia species currently identified and all endemic to Southeast Asia are found in the Philippines. One species, the Rafflesia arnoldii, which is native to the rainforests of Malaysia and Indonesia, is known for its biggest single bloom called “monster flower,” measuring three feet wide and weighing 15 pounds.

The smallest, the R. consueloae, was identified and described in 2016 by a research team from the University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman and Los Baños units while monitoring biodiversity in Pantabangan, Nueva Ecija. It is classified as critically endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature; other species endemic to Philippine forests are vulnerable or endangered.

Related: Birds flying into manmade things

Appalling but appealing

Each rafflesia flower is infamous for its rotting-flesh smell—appalling to humans but appealing to scientists and its pollinators, the flies, for its pungent yet unknown floral delight. 

Two centuries since the discovery of the first species, most research papers have described the plant’s physiological and genetic aspects. But comprehensive studies are very limited because of its rare presence in clusters at different stages of growth. 

The Nueva Ecija rafflesia, originally discovered by local field assistants of the UP research team and thoroughly studied and submitted for species description by the late biologist Perry S. Ong, stands out among other species for its existence in numerous clumps on one host vine, making it ideal for the conduct of new research. 

Named after Consuelo Rufino Lopez, the wife of Filipino industrialist Oscar M. Lopez, the R. consueloae measures only 9-10 centimeters in diameter in full bloom, or the size of a coffee cup.

‘Holoparasites’

According to Dr. Erika Bascos, a developmental biologist from UP Diliman, the R. consueloae clumps, numbering about 280 buds per host vine of the genus Tetrastigma (Vitaceae), allow researchers to conduct replication and perform sampling and experiments without fear of hurting the entire population. 

Bascos, in her published article in the Planta journal, focused her research on the early stages of flower development that may hold the key to opening the secrets of the Rafflesiaceae family. 

Like the previously discovered species, the R. consueloae are holoparasites, or not capable of photosynthesis, and thus complete their life cycle without exploiting a suitable host, the Tetrastigma vines. 

“The research … gave us the opportunity to examine the early stages of infection within the host, and for the first time, we were able to see where the infection starts and determine the parts of the host that the infection may reach,” Bascos said.

She described the vegetative growth of R. consueloae, particularly in the early stages of “infection,” and its life cycle as an endophyte (preemergence of floral shoot from the host). 

After an examination of a total of 1,278 root and 684 stem sections excised from Tetrastigma vines, it was found that R. consueloae infections were limited only to the roots of the host but did not pose a deadly threat to the host. However, it may have slightly affected the growth of host flowers, which is crucial in reproduction. 

“The tissues obtained from different host individuals also had varying degrees of infection, alluding to a possible role of host resistance mechanisms and/or varying levels of parasite infectiousness,” Bascos said. 

First evidence 

Showing microscopically how the single, isolated parasitic cells progressed to early floral buds, the study provided the first evidence that the R. consueloae may remain in vegetative form for more than half a year before reproduction. 

Moreover, the floral shoot may develop even without the widespread growth of its endophyte within the host root, indicating that extensive vegetative growth is not a prerequisite to reproductive development, Bascos said. 

The hosts, she added, could still be infected with endophytes even without external growth. 

‘Bud abortion’

The R. consueloae tend to die without reaching full maturity inside their host in a natural process called “bud abortion,” Bascos said. Even without the presence of predators or pathogens or other factors, the buds abort on their own and stop developing. 

“In a study conducted by Tolod et al., the mortality rate of the buds is 77.34% during the abortion,” Bascos said. “And among the flower samples they took, only 19.73% bloomed and reached maturity. Without developing, there will be no chance for fruit formation and pollination; therefore, natural reproduction won’t occur.”

Bascos’ findings could encourage further research on how to successfully propagate rafflesia seeds outside the living host. 

“In the last few years, a number of rafflesia in-vitro seed germination and tissue culture experiments were reported, but none were successful,” she said, adding: 

“There may be a unique chemical signalling happening between the host and the parasite, or there is something in the living tissues of the host that allows rafflesia to germinate and grow within the host.”  

Conservation efforts

Due to their conservation status, turning their habitat into a tourist attraction will put the flowers in danger. Tourists could accidentally step on and harm the Rafflesia blooms, especially those under the forest soil. 

Moreover, poachers collect the flowers for profit or for export.

The rafflesia remains a complex and delicate specimen to understand and study because of its unique nature to its host, Tetrastigma spp.. It has proven to be difficult—even impossible—to germinate and propagate outside its natural habitat. 

Because of its parasitic nature, the Rafflesia family’s survival depends on its host. Conservation efforts by local authorities and biologists are thus crucial in maintaining both plant populations. 

Carlo Frances Luayon is a former broadcast storyteller and currently works as a senior science communicator at the University of the Philippines’ College of Sciences in Diliman, Quezon City. —Ed.

The post Smallest rafflesia blooms reveal some family secrets appeared first on CoverStory.