By Sarah K. Joaquin.Carayan Press, San Francisco, CA. 2007. 209 pp.
By Antonio V. Romu?ldez
It bears stating at the outset that a “simple faith” or even a folksy one is nothing to be scoffed at. It was Pope Benedict XVI, indeed, who said recently that “believers should present a simple, loving faith to a secular world." It was he who stressed in the same homily delivered on September 12, 2006, at a Mass in Regensburg that “faith is built upon a simple relationship with a loving God.” In the same breath he affirmed that “deep down, . . . [the faith] is quite simple."
As a news report of that homily points out, the Pope noted that “the Church has provided the faithful with a ‘little Summa’ in which everything essential is expressed," and “that statement of faith. . . is the Apostle’s Creed." A simple faith is a lived faith really, professed unostentatiously but deeply, often in the context of human weakness and sinfulness, and allowed to fill in a significant even if unobtrusive way the very milieu of our lives.
Communities
of such simple faith figured significantly in Sarah Joaquin’s life.
She was born in San Isidro, Nueva Ecija, some one hundred and
eighty-five kilometers north of Manila. There church bells still rang
to announce the Angelus, baptisms and funerals, and the Masses of the
day. As did the church bells in Sta. Cruz, Laguna, where Sarah spent
her childhood days and, from her father, learned of God’s creation
and the proper appreciation of birds and many other of God’s
creatures, and in San Miguel, Bulacan, where each year her family
would go for the traditional Christmas gathering, where she played to
her heart’s content with her favorite cousins, Irineo and Meneleo,
and with the neighbors’ children. And when in her seventh
year she was placed as a boarder at the “Centro Escolar de
Senoritas”, there too she lived in an environment of simple faith:
fifteen-minute morning and night prayers, the rosary, Sunday
Mass in special holiday uniforms of “pink satin, with a square
neckline with a collar trimmed with lace and with six
mother-of-pearl buttons in front," exercises in the virtues and
“workshops” in civility, Bible History and catechism, First
Communion, an implicit faith in the efficacy of prayers, to God some
times but often to Our Lady and the saints, each invoked upon for his
or her patronage of some special area affecting human lives.
Omnipresent
was a deep - almost instinctive — sense of Providence, which
sometimes was still referred to, in the speech of the folk, as
“Fate”. When it became clear to her that her mother opposed
her relationship with Ping Joaquin, Sarah did not let it bother her
“too much": she remarked, “I was also willing to leave
Fate to take it from there." On the day she eloped
nevertheless, she prayed that God would bless her decision, “since
it was He who allowed me to get this far with my love." And
after her separation from Ping, she welcomed her appointment as head
of the Radio Department at Far Eastern University as a “blessed
relief.” She saw it as a “new lease on life” that had
been given her. When, in June 1958, she was given a baby boy
for adoption, she saw it as a “miracle from God. . . . Perhaps,”
she said, “a fitting reward for my volunteer services to the
community and, at the same time, an assurance of God’s love
to assuage the pain of a solitary existence." It must have
been less than two years afterwards when she received an offer of a
Fullbright scholarship to spend some two years in the Speech and
Drama Department of the Catholic University of America under the
tutelage of the renowned dramatist, Rev. Gilbert P. Hartke.
In
the face of her indecision about accepting it, brought on by a sense
of duty to her aging father, Sarah asked God for a sign: “I
asked Him to give me a red rose within one week." A
different flower or color would have meant that she would have to
turn down the offer. Four days later, out of the blue as it
were, she received her red rose from a Thai student who had purchased
it for her from a vendor near the church of Santa Mesa, “because I
know you love roses.”
Sarah
Joaquin’s hope is variously delineated throughout the book. It
is expressed initially as a seven-year old’s trust in her father’s
decision to enroll her as a boarder at the “Centro Escolar de
Senoritas’, to be “guided in the proper direction with strict and
consistent discipline softened with gentle patience" and “be
brought up to be good Roman Catholics". In her imaginings
during her first few weeks in the school, she found in the gala
uniform for the adult students the appropriate symbol for her hope, a
Filipino “terno” on the butterfly sleeves of which was
embroidered the school logo with the words “Ciencia y Virtud”.
She writes: “I remember a feeling of hope then that
someday I would qualify to wear that gala ‘terno’." Four
years later, she was to define her aspirations in terms of higher
achievement still when she spoke of wearing the “terno” as the
class valedictorian, the graduate to be honored with the /Excelencia/
Award for consistently ranking first in schoolwork and conduct
throughout high school.
Two
thoughts, not unrelated, filled my mind when I finished reading this
book: first, that a deep hope, generated in large measure by a
faith that was simple and sometimes even folksy, drove the “dynamo”
that, her brother-in-law Nick Joaquin wrote in the Introduction,
Sarah Joaquin was; and second, that her story reminded me of one
Kristin Lavransdatter, a fictional heroine of similar faith and hope,
whose story, told in trilogy by Sigrid Undset, the Nobel Prize winner
for literature in 1928, I had read in the early fifties.
Coincidentally, that was the same period when I first
encountered the name of Sarah Joaquin. It was at the gala
performances of “A Portrait of the Artist as Filipino". She
was at that time playing Pepang, the thoroughly modern Marasigan
sister of Nick Joaquin’s classic “elegy [of Manila] in three
acts."
Hope
found expression too in a resolve, made in the midst of a Christmas
season without Ping amid forebodings of her failing marriage, to
“hold on to the children” and to cultivate “the arts that I had
learned and loved from childhood and that had been fostered at the
/Centro/ [/Escolar de Senoritas/]."
More
often than not, hope emerged as prayer: to God, for blessing on
the day of her elopement with Ping Joaquin in 1929; to Our Lady of
the Rosary, for her advocacy before God on the matter of forgiveness,
not for past sins but for the hurt, still in the future, the
elopement would inflict on family and friends; to Saint Anthony, for
his intercession on her wish that a boy would be born from her first
pregnancy; to Our Lady of Lourdes, for her mediation on Ping and
Sarah’s petition for a girl from her second pregnancy; to God, for
his help “so that [on the real reasons for Ping and Sarah’s
separation] my children and my parents would someday be proud of me";
and to the Black Nazarene of Quiapo [Jesus Christ of the /Via Crucis/
— on the Way of the Cross], for the grace of liberation from a
“relationship [with a man] that was not at all uplifting" and
was, indeed, becoming fodder for gossip.
Aside
from the grit and passion that both Sarah Joaquin and Kristin
Lavransdatter exhibit, the link between their stories, I believe,
derive from the story line of each narrative and the themes that
emerge as a result of the interplay of character, culture, and faith:
Kristin, in a Norway that is so much a part of medieval
Christendom; and Sarah, in a Philippines still deeply imbued with the
values and traditions of the Catholic missionaries of Spain, even if
not entirely freed from folk beliefs of their pre-Christian
ancestors, and at the same time nevertheless, beginning to pick up
the secularist and pragmatic perspectives of the American
colonizers of the early twentieth century.
The
story line follows the life of each from the age of seven under the
firm and caring guidance of a good father and the constant and active
support of an uncommunicative, even if loving, mother, through
adolescence and young womanhood, and adulthood as wife and mother.
It
depicts love-choices at once passionately and single-mindedly made,
which leave in the women’s lives unremitting undercurrents of
disappointment and pain, pain above all brought on by memories of
“one time happiness. . . shared" and, always, cherished.
There is redemption nevertheless in the many little victories
that life offers, in the exercise of motherhood, in the cultivation
of relationships among family and friends, old and new, at home and
abroad, and in the accomplishment of tasks, domestic as well as
professional, in the service of God and their communities.
The
principal difference between the story of Sarah Joaquin and that of
Kristin Lavransdatter is that the latter is fiction and a finished
work: / finished/ in the sense as much of “completed” as of
having been finely wrought. Sarah’s story is a memoir and is
/unfinished/ in several respects. Death had taken her before
she had a chance to take her narrative through her life as an
immigrant in the United States, for the most part her twilight years.
How so laden with reflection would her account of those days
have been! Twilight, whether in a day or in a life is the
moment of reflection in any woman’s day or life - and any man’s,
I know. Moreover, hardly enough is said about her children and
how she related to each of them, and, from her perspective, they,
with her. This is a major loss to us who know Sarah and her
children well. How so revealing it could have been of a
dimension of special tenderness in the person that she was! We
are permitted a glimpse of it, when, in one of the few instances in
which she mentions her children, she remarks, almost in passing, on
how, after her separation from Ping Joaquin, she was kept busy
“teaching and broadcasting, and at home seeing to the comfort of my
children, who were very sympathetic towards their father and
disappointed in their mother." Poignant! So unbearably
poignant indeed. Yet understated so utterly.
/Of
Laughter and Tears/ is /unfinished/ in more senses than one. Sarah’s
illnesses and occasional hospitalization in those last few months of
her life took away whatever opportunity she was counting on to
clarify and examine, or at least draw from the narrative of her
memoir, several issues roiling the larger Philippine cultural milieu,
with which she grappled, sometimes subconsciously.
The
differing or “double” standards, for example, with which Filipino
society measured the moral performance of men and women in the dance
of courtship and marriage left Sarah “terribly hurt,” “confused”
and “unsure,” and, to a point, somewhat progressively cynical
about “male-female relationships.” Though not entirely
convinced, after entreaty and even pressure from her elders, men and
women alike, she recognized then that the infidelity of the male was
“part and parcel of male-female relationships." It was
something she found “hard to accept and even harder still to
forgive." Sarah also struggled with two other issues,
related to the first. One was what appeared to have been
presented to her as the absolute principle, unquestioned by family
and friends and passed on to her in various forms of admonition and
instruction, and even warning, that a wife was never ever to deny her
husband “ the pleasure that he sought.” And the
other, underlying the creeping insecurity and occasional displeasure
and sarcasm of her husband over Sarah’s growing stature at the
university and in the theater, the assumption that he should earn
enough “to at least equal” what she would be earning.
The
theme of guilt and its impact on the direction of a person’s future
actions is present in this memoir, but it remains unexplored in terms
of her values and beliefs. Very soon after the couple’s first
child, Tony, is born he is turned over to Sarah’s parents. About
the event she writes: “I had the same longings [as her
mother’s ‘to hold the boy close to her bosom’] but I was quite
ready to give him to her for a while so to makeup [sic] in a very
small way, for what hurt I gave them by my unexpected elopement."
He is raised by them in Sta. Cruz, Laguna, through his first
six or seven years. I wonder, had she had time to finish her
memoir, would she have reflected on this event not so much
necessarily on its consequences for Tony (who, I know as a friend,
thrived with his grandparents) as on how, for example, it could have
changed the circumstances of her marriage and life with her husband.
Not
too long after Sarah’s discovery of Ping’s infidelity, she spoke
these words to him: “Okay, Ping. Let’s get one thing
straight. I want you to understand that every action has
its corresponding reaction. Not that I’m planning on it, but
if some day in the future I pay you back with the same coin [the coin
of unfaithfulness], don’t hold it against me."
Would
Sarah have remembered these words had she been permitted to write the
final chapters of her memoir? Would she have realized the irony
of it all? Its prophetic significance? A few words spoken
in anger, maybe, and frustration? Would she have thought that
her veiled “threat” - for that is what it sounded like - uttered
some time in 1933 reverberated still in Ping’s memory in 1946?
Enough to arouse his jealous anxieties and aggravate the rift
between him and Sarah, and eventually bring about their separation?
Would she have speculated that she could have been driven,
perhaps even subconsciously, by the sentiments she had expressed in
these words into her close relationship with her friend Jose, who
would be the object of Ping’s jealousy?
Like
Kristin Lavransdatter, Sarah had come to a profound understanding of
what it is to live a life of one’s creation. In her strength,
she knew, lay her weakness. She realized her vulnerability to
her own awesome pluck and passion. Notwithstanding her many
awards and accomplishments, her life in Falls Church, Virginia during
her declining years reflected a sense of her own frailty. She
came to recognize that her hope at last - our hope indeed — lay in
the divine mercy. She must have recalled, if not from her own
schooldays, certainly from those of her son, Tony, at the Ateneo,
that image of God as “the hound of heaven” who, driven by love,
has pursued man through all of history “with deliberate speed and
majestic instancy." For as in the “Epilogue” Fred de
la Rosa, her son-in-law, says of those years, “she lived by the
biblical injunction on forgiveness. Her faith was strong and
her obedience to her Maker was absolute. This showed not only
in her churchgoing but also in her daily life. She had willed
her life to God."
The
book is /unfinished/ in its more mechanical aspects too. Copy- and
proof-reading could have been more carefully done. Not a few
typographical errors would have been avoided: misspelled proper
names, missing commas, duplicated words or phrases, missing periods,
missing auxiliary verbs, periods in place of commas, and words
misspelled because of missing letters. Much more scrupulous
editing could also have caught some slips in syntax, slips probably
carried over from the original. It would have served readers
well, moreover, had a chronology of the more important dates in
Sarah’s life been appended to the text. Without it I had difficulty
placing events of some significance in the narrative in an
appropriate time-line. In order to get my bearings as it were, I felt
that I had to reconstruct from other sources a chronological outline
for my own reference.
That
Sarah Joaquin’s memoir is/ unfinished/ ought not detract from its
value. It still leaves us with the facts of her life and with
some of her thoughts on that life. It remains for someone of
understanding and vision, perhaps a close friend, a son or a close
relation, to take this book and do a biography of the woman, giving
it the depth of treatment, the rich literary texture and the
delicately designed structure that a Sarah Joaquin /vita/ deserves.
Until that is written nevertheless, those of us interested in
the person can appreciate this memoir, Sarah Joaquin in her own
words, hurried maybe and /unfinished/, but genuinely herself to the
core.
I
must, in conclusion, admit that I have not been able to distance
myself enough from Sarah’s story to achieve some meaningful degree
of impartiality in this review. She was Tita Sarah to me from
the first moment I met her, someone I appreciated as an affectionate
aunt to my wife, someone I respected and cherished as a person, and
hailed for her talent and achievements in the Philippine theater and
at the university. Tony, her son, and I have been close friends
for some decades now, since my college days at the Ateneo de Manila
and since that year we happened to be together as graduate students
in Toronto, Canada when it was not yet the audacious town that it has
become. I have tried to point out some of the book’s positive
qualities, and some of its negatives too, but I have done so not as a
critic but as an old friend merely, trying to be helpful. Should
these observations contribute in some small measure to her children’s
efforts to come forward with a good biography or, at least, a more/
finished/ second edition of Sarah’s memoir, my purpose would have
been well served.