It was inevitable. A blog entitled “Flowers from the Rubble” would eventually blog the author of “Flowers from the Rubble”.
I’ve been reading Conrado de Quiros for quite some time now, and apart from the elegance of his writing and the ease with which he marries the philosophical with the political, I’ve always been impressed with the quality of his anger. In this respect, Conrado de Quiros is very much like Gene Hackman. Fametracker: The Farmer’s Almanac of Celebrity Worth (http://www.fametracker.com/fame_audit/hackman_gene.shtml), once observed “there are few thrills in modern cinema more satisfying than the sight of Gene Hackman losing his temper. Whether low and coiled or at a rolling boil, Hackman has more shades of anger than most actors have shades, period.”
I suppose what I’m saying is that I like Conrado de Quiros, especially when he is angry. I only mention this because many of my friends share the same sentiments as Marlon Alcantara, who opined, “I used to read with great interest the columns of Conrado de Quiros. But they have become nauseating; all they contain are views against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. I am not pro-Gloria, but I hope De Quiros will once again appreciate variety, not just limit his columns to Arroyo stories.” (Published on page A12 of the October 18, 2005 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, and http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.php?index=2&story_id=53686&col=77)
De Quiros acknowledges the fact that Alcantara has every right to his opinion, but he also insists that as a writer, he cannot help but write about President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo:
“Ages ago, during the launching of my first book, I said that at the deepest level of things, you do not really choose your topics, they choose you. You write about them because you are compelled to, because they are there, in the sense that Edmund Hilary used the phrase. When asked why he climbed Mt. Everest, he answered, “Because it is there.” He did not mean that as a choice, he meant it as a necessity.
I write nearly exclusively about Ms Arroyo today because she is there. In this case, that isn’t just metaphorical, that is literal. I am exceptionally compelled to do so because Ms Arroyo is there when she should not be there.”
It might be tough to slog through a de Quiros column nowadays, but I still keep at it. He might be stubborn, overly dramatic (at times), or too emotionally invested in his sincere concern for the Filipino, but he’s still a damn good read. Besides, he’s the anti-Bill Bixby, from The Incredible Hulk, the TV series. Make him angry. You would really like him when he’s angry.
1 comments:
Hey John -- I have a different opinion of De Quiros. I like him better when he’s more laid back. I’ve read some of his column pieces when he discussed things other than politics (Australian Open tennis, music in a piano lounge, etc.) and I enjoy his writing that way. But while I believe his motive for writing is in line with his patriotism, I just get tired of the endless whining (GMA for instance). It just gets old after a while. In some past column pieces (the migration problem for one), I believe he also crossed the line and made rash generalizations, not to mention singled out one individual jus to support his point. Laid back, he’s a cool guy. Pissed, I just think he’s a cranky old whiner.
The Incredible Hulk was a really cool show though.
Post a Comment