Pensionados and Workers: The Filipinos in the United States, 1903

Asian and Pacific Migration Journal, Vol. 8, Nos. 1-2, 1999 157

* Translated from Pilipino.

Pensionados and Workers:The Filipinos in the

United States, 1903-1956*

Noel V. Teodoro

University of the Philippines

Between 1903 and 1956, there were two groups of Filipino "migrants" to theUnited States: the government scholars known as pensionados and workers.Distinct also were their experiences as migrants as well as the role that theyplayed in the Philippines (in the case of the pensionados) and the United States(in the case of the workers). The article raises the question of rootednes to orestrangement from Filipino culture in assessing the influence of thesemigrants on their country of origin.

Period Covered

The period covered by this study begins on August 26, 1903, the passage ofLaw No. 854 which provided for public funds to support the studies of 100Filipinos (who became known as pensionados, i.e., scholars who receivedpensions or financial support from the government) in selected academicinstitutions in the United States (US), and ends in 1956, the passing away ofCarlos S. Bulosan in Seattle, Washington. Coming from a family of farmers,Bulosan went to the West Coast of the US in 1930, during the Great EconomicDepression, when some 108,260 (San Juan, Jr., 1996:63) Filipinos, majority ofwhom were workers, were scattered throughout America. It was also in1930 (San Juan, Jr., 1996:98) when Jose Garcia Villa, the Filipino poet whowrote in English, migrated to the US. After becoming a victim of racism inNew Mexico (San Juan, Jr., 1984b:74), where he earned his Bachelor of Arts

158 ASIAN AND PACIFIC MIGRATION JOURNAL

degree from the University of New Mexico in 1932, Villa moved to NewYork in 1941 to finish his master’s studies in Columbia University. Villa diedin the US in 1997, not as a Filipino but as an American citizen.

It was also in the same period, in 1932 (Manuel, 1955:4), when JuanAbad died in Amoy, China. Abad wrote the anti-imperialist play, TanikalangGinto (The Golden Chain). It was first staged in Teatro Libertad in 1902, a yearbefore the Philippine Commission, then headed by the first civilian gover-nor William Howard Taft, approved the Pensionado Act, one of the instru-ments used to promote education as a tool for colonization. Juan Abad wasone of many Filipinos who opposed American imperialism, in spite ofefforts to silence their nationalism through numerous laws forbidding theexpression of nationalist and patriotic sentiments. The Anti-Sedition Act of1901, for example, prohibited Filipinos from supporting causes seeking foremancipation from the US (Agoncillo, 1980:241-242), and provided for thedeath penalty to anyone violating the said law. Abad was charged withsedition when his play, Tanikalang Ginto, was staged in Batangas City,Batangas on May 10, 1903. The court sentenced him to two years’ imprison-ment and slapped him with a $2,000 penalty. The Supreme Court, however,reversed the decision of the Court of First Instance. Abad was arrested againin 1904 when his other nationalist play, Isang Punlo ng Kaaway (The Enemy’sBullet), was staged in Rizal Theater in Malabon, Rizal on May 8 of the sameyear. After this incident, he was not able to write another play. In 1923, Abadjoined the Legionarios del Trabajo and edited its newspaper called Araw (TheSun), the legion’s symbol. The group went to China in 1928, then returnedto Manila, and went back to China where Abad died.

Juan Abad and other Tagalog writers as Deogracias Rosano, JuanMatapang Cruz, Aurelio Tolentino, Jose Corazon de Jesus and BenignoRamos, foresaw the ill effects of the covetous and abusive American forces(which Death knifed in the last scene of Tanikalang Ginto) on the archipelago.He also foresaw that the Americanization of society could erode the Filipinoidentity, which was staunchly defended by Liwanag or Kalayaan ng InangBayan (Light or Freedom of the Mother Land) and K’Ulayaw or MandirigmangBayan/Rebolusyonaryo (Warrior or Revolutionary of the Motherland).

The insular government continued to pursue and persecute the so-called “irreconcilables” (those who opposed American imperialism) throughthe Anti-banditry Law enacted on November 12, 1902. According to the law,all those who join a guerilla movement that continues to fight the colonialgovernment (e.g., Macario Sakay of the Tagalogs, Simeon Ola of the Bicolanosand Vicente Lukban of the Visayas, and others), will be considered asbandits because they refuse to cooperate with the Americans. Those foundguilty will be sentenced to death or life imprisonment. In 1903, a ZoningOrdinance was also passed, which gave the governor-general the power to

159PENSIONADOS AND WORKERS

grant provincial governors the authority to conduct zoning in towns whichwere suspected as havens of “thieves and bandits.” Zoning was to beimplemented in towns or in large barrios (Agoncillo, 1980:243). In 1907,another law was enacted prohibiting Filipinos to unfurl any kind of flag orobject used against the Americans, as well as Revolutionary flags or flagsused by the Katipunan (Agoncillo, 1980:248). It was revoked in 1919, afterwhich the raising of the Filipino flag was allowed. These policies were partof the broader program outlined in President William McKinley’s procla-mation (Agoncillo and Guerrero, 1977:263) on December 21, 1898.

The Politics of Americanization

McKinley’s proclamation stated that in carrying out the responsibility of abenevolent American rule, those in power can wield the iron fist to sup-press any “disorder” until obstacles to the granting of a good and stablegovernment for the Filipinos have been neutralized, a rationale that is lacedwith imperialist arguments. In the process of establishing a new politicalauthority to replace the old colonial regime, those in authority would strictlyimplement policies and guidelines in accordance with the law. On the otherhand, it also expressed that authorities should win and pacify the colonizedcountry so that they will eventually accept the reality of their defeat. In thisconnection, the Filipino public should be informed, through the soon-to-be-established public schools, that the Americans came to the Philippines notas conquerors but as allies whose mission of “benevolent assimilation” canbe likened to the “white man’s burden” of the English and the ”missioncivilisatrice” of the French. It follows that it is the responsibility of the foreign“friend” to protect the natives in their homes, work, and their enjoyment ofindividual and religious rights. In keeping with the primary mission of theadministration, the authorities would try to gain the Fili-pinos’ trust, respectand affection. They will also support citizens who are prepared to help thecolonial administration. For their part, Filipinos could prove their whole-hearted cooperation by actively supporting and submitting to the newly-installed American government in the islands. Those who cooperate andcollaborate would be assured of the support, protection and appointment tolucrative posts in government as was the experience of Cayetano Arellano,who was appointed as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and TrinidadH. Pardo de Tavera and Benito Legarda, who were both assigned to thePhilippine Commission (Constantino, 1975:233-234).

Other Filipinos who assumed key positions in the government includedFlorentino Torres, who was also appointed as Chief Justice. Felipe Buen-camino declared in 1902 that he was an American and that the money of theFilipinos, and even the elements — the wind, light and day — belonged tothe US. Another supporter of American rule, Pedro Paterno, pushed for the


annexation of the Philippines as a federal state of the US. A known pro-American and elected president of the pro-American Federal Party, Taveraproclaimed that he wholeheartedly accepted the American government(Cruz, 1956). Early on, in his letter to General Arthur MacArthur, he hadalready said that:

After gaining independence, all our efforts will be focused on ourAmericanization. Also, the study and propagation of the Englishlanguage in the Philippines is justifiable, so that we will internalizethe American spirit, and though this, we can acquire the aspira-tions, political traditions and its unique culture in the hope that, inthe end, our safety and redemption will become full and complete(Constantino, 1975:237).

American rule was initially implemented by the commandant of theoccupation forces. The support of the Americanistas (American sympathiz-ers), a group of Filipino ilustrados who had shifted their loyalty to the US,was important in the campaign for peace, whose attainment was dependenton the acceptance and recognition of the “legitimate” government (e.g., notSakay’s Tagalog Republic) and the surrender of the enemies in the country-side. It was not enough to conquer the territory. It was also deemednecessary to capture the consciousness or minds of the conquered. Concern-ing this, General MacArthur said that he could not think of any other agencythat could significantly help in ensuring the success of pacification effortsthan the institution of a public school system (Dery, 1995:160). In 1919, theDirector of Education reported that every peso spent for educationalprograms, especially in the provinces, meant a corresponding decrease inthe budget allotted for maintaining peace and order (Dery, 1995). TheAmerican armed forces, whose members performed the dual role of soldierand teacher, the Thomasites1 and the pensionados, who became avid support-ers of the state (San Juan, Jr., 1984b:72-73),2 the colonial bureaucracy, and thepublic education system, which was patterned after the American system,were recognized as instrumental to the whole campaign.

1. They were the American teachers who arrived in the Philippines on board the S.S. Thomas.A discussion on their role in education and socio-economic change in the Philippines can befound in Corpuz (1967).

2. According to San Juan, Jr. (1983:72-73), "The establishment of the pensionado system ...helped to turn out docile civil service functionaries who served the State apparatuses.Eventually, this policy of stultification bore fruit of such wide diversity..."


The Pensionado as the New Ilustrado

Taft supported the idea of the pensionado program. He proposed recruitingtwo or three young bright male students from each town each year, sendthem to the US for further studies, while involving their family and othersconcerned about their welfare with the American administration, andrequiring them to return immediately after completing their studies (Cruz,1974:353). The Bureau of Insular Affairs (BIA) administered the sending ofFilipino students to the US under the said program. The first group of 100pensionados arrived in San Francisco on November 9, 1903 (Cruz, 1974:354).The BIA received them well. BIA identified families who were willing toguide and impart the American way to the pensionados. To facilitate theirassimilation process, particularly in the area of language, the BIA chosefamilies who lived in small towns rather than in big cities. The pensionadoswere also assigned to different areas so that they would interact beyondtheir own groups. The BIA also tried to look for host families whose faith andreligion were compatible with that of the Filipino “guest” to ensure that asimilar religious influence will pervade in the household. T.H. Pardo deTavera authored the Pensionado Act (Cruz, 1974:352). He was very keen inexpanding the elite class in the Philippines; most of the pensionados that hesupported came from rich families. If ever they were from the lower class,upon their return from their studies abroad, the pensionados easily mixedwith the high and elite class to the point that they identified themselves withthis class (Cruz, 1974). In the end, they became “agents” or followers ofAmericanism, if not cultural imperialism in the Philippines, and theybecame peddlers of a consciousness formed by the American way of life.They formed the new ilustrados who knew how to write, read and speak inEnglish. But unlike the ilustrados of the past 19th century, who all belongedto the principalia-cacique class (local elite), the new ilustrados came from abroader sector of society (Lumbera and Lumbera, 1982:110).

The long list of pensionados (Olivar, 1950; Quirino, 1995) includesFilipinos who served in the different political, economic and culturalagencies and institutions of the country. One example is Jose Abad Santos,who was born in San Fernando, Pampanga on February 19, 1886 and diedin Malabang, Lanao on May 2, 1942. Abad Santos studied at NorthwesternUniversity in Illinois and took his master’s studies at George WashingtonUniversity. In 1911, he started working as a clerk, then as a court interpreterand as a lawyer of various government corporations. Appointed as Secre-tary of the Department of Justice in 1928, Abad Santos became the ChiefJustice of the Supreme Court in December 1941 while simultaneouslyserving as Secretary of Finance, Agriculture and Commerce. Assigned as the“caretaker” of the Commonwealth Government when Manuel L. Quezon


decided to go to the US in 1942, Abad Santos was killed by the Japanesebecause of his firm resistance against collaborating with them.

Benigno V. Aldana was born in Pozzorubio, Pangasinan on November19, 1899 and died in the University of Sto. Tomas Hospital on July 6, 1963.Aldana finished his master’s studies in the University of California atBerkeley in 1933. He worked in Quezon’s Committee on Education in 1940and became the presidential adviser on educational issues in 1954, and thedirector of public schools in 1957. As education director, he allowed thepublication of textbooks in Filipino languages such as Samal and Tausog.Encarnacion Alzona was also known in the field of education(Camagay,1996; 1997:20-25).3 Alzona was born in Biñan, Laguna although she grew upin Tayabas (now the province of Quezon). In fact, her work, History ofEducation in the Philippines, 1565-1930 (1932) is considered as the firstsignificant book written by a Filipina. As a product of the Americanization(or westernization) process in and out of the country, Alzona published twoarticles that discussed and celebrated this experience.4 A contrary view wasexpressed by Teodoro M. Kalaw in 1927, former editor of the newspaper Elrenacimiento (The Rebirth), who noted the deleterious effects of American-ization on the Philippines.5 An editorial that saw print in 1908 in El

3. Her works are the subject of Camagay's (1996), Encarnacion Alzona: An Anthology. Otherwomen scholars who studied in the US were Honoria Sison Acosta (born in Calasiao,Pangasinan on December 30, 1888; died on January 19, 1970), the first woman doctor in thePhilippines; Luisa Sison of Pangasinan, Elizabeth Florendo and Eleonor de Leon of Ilocos Sur,Genoveva Llamas of Laguna, Clemente Asturias of Romblon, Pilar Elumba of Surigao andOlivia Salamanea (born in San Roque, Cavite on July 1, 1889; died in Hong Kong on July 11,1913). They are the pensionadas mentioned in Camagay (1997:20-25); pensionadas from theVisayas and Mindanao are also mentioned in this article. Maria Y. Orosa (born in Batangas onNovember 29, 1893; died in Manila on February 19, 1945) was not a pensionada but had workedin the US. Quirino (1971:153) described her experiences as follows, "Once in Seattle in 1916,she worked as a housemaid to Mrs. Wrentmore, mother-in-law of Governor General FrancisBurton Harrison, for $100 a month. She studied pharmacy at the University of Washington.Received a degree in pharmaceutical chemistry. Returned to the Philippines, 1920, and taughtat Centro Escolar University. Became chief of the food preservation division at the Bureau ofScience in 1928... She was sent to Europe by the government to observe commercial foodpreservation." The historical context of the pensionadas has been analyzed by Taguiwalo(1997:30-38).

4. These are: "The Americanization of the Filipino," The Herald Midweek Magazine, 18 May1932, p.3; and "Westernization of Filipino Women not to be Regretted," The Philippines Herald,25 September, p.4 (in Camagay, 1995:406).

5. An excerpt from "Americanization," an editorial written in Spanish and translated intoEnglish by N.G. Tiongson stated: “Many think that foreignization is manifested only in the badand ridiculous which importation brings us, like balloon pants, short skirts and bobbed hair,


renacimiento described the foreign conquerors as aves de rapiña (birds ofprey). Alzona’s other writings generally regarded the colonial experiencein less negative terms. In her El legado de España a Filipinas (Spain’s Legacyto the Philippines, 1956), Alzona mentioned as a hispanist that the separa-tion of the Philippines from Spain was but political, while its cultural legacywill persist in mother Spain’s old colony. Alzona’s book is divided into fourchapters namely: La llegada de Magallanes (The Arrival of Magellan), Lacultura pre-hispana de los isleños (Pre-Hispanic Culture of the Islanders), Ellegado de España (The Legacy of Spain), and Epilogo (Epilogue). The bookrevealed Alzona’s western point of view, which was part of the training thatshe acquired as a pensionada in the US where she obtained her masters fromRadcliffe College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1920 and her doctoratefrom Columbia University, New York, in 1922, both in the field of history.Upon her return, Alzona was tasked to teach courses on western civilizationat the University of the Philippines’ (UP) Department of History until 1945.She also served as a university regent from 1959 up to 1966. Before theSecond World War, Alzona was actively involved in the suffragist move-ment, the campaign to grant women the right to vote, which has alreadybeen granted to women in the US in 1920. Perhaps this left a deep impressionin the pensionada. Probably another reflection of her involvement in women’sissues is the book, The Filipino Woman: Her Social, Economic and PoliticalStatus, 1565-1933 (1934), which was followed up in 1939 by Ang Bisa saLipunang Pilipino ng “Urbana at Feliza,” (The Impact of “Urbana and Feliza”on Filipino Society). The latter was a book written by a Filipino secularpriest, Modesto de Castro, which, although disguised as a book on etiquette,actually imparted feudal and colonial values, especially for women.

Leandro H. Fernandez, born in Pagsanjan, Laguna on March 13, 1889,was Alzona’s colleague in the teaching profession (Manuel, 1970:187-200).Fernandez earned his degree in education from the Tri-State College inAngola, Indiana, in 1910, Ph.B. (1912) and masters in history (1913) from theUniversity of Chicago, and Ph.D. (1926) from Columbia University. Hisdissertation, The Philippine Republic, was published in the US in 1926 as Vol.CXXII, Number 1 of a series of “studies on history, economy and public

5. (continued)and that if we condemn these pants and ridicule these hair and shirts and force our sons anddaughters not to imitate these bad examples, we shall have eliminated all danger forever…There is another foreignization or Americanization which comes, which has already arrived,which is propagating itself, much stronger now than yesterday, and tomorrow more terriblethan today, and it is the foreignization or Americanization of our wants and needs; becauseof which we find ourselves unnecessarily forced to use foreign objects, or to prefer the foreignto our own, on an account of the failure of our own ways.” The complete text of the editorial,translated in English, can be found in C.N. Lumbera and Maceda (1983:155-157)


laws” in Columbia University. Upon his return to Manila in 1914, Fernandezwas tasked to teach in Tondo Elementary School, but after two months, hewas appointed as instructor in history at the UP. Ginn & Co. (Boston)published his work, A Brief History of the Philippines (1919), which was usedas a textbook for grade seven students in public schools all over the country.In his introduction, Fernandez said that he deliberately excluded controver-sial debates that will only cause confusion in the minds of the students.Perhaps this is the reason why the book was silent on the subject of the broadnationalist and anti-imperialist movement during the first decade of the 20th

century. Not a single page in Fernandez’s textbook referred to the topic,while he discussed the rebellion, uprisings and “Moro wars” that broke outunder the Spanish regime. In 1921, “The Formation of Filipino Nationality”was published in the Philippine Journal of Education and Thinking for Our-selves, a collection of essays edited by Vicente M. Hilario and Eliseo Quirino,both assistant professors in English at the UP. Fernandez was appointed asUP registrar (1927), dean of the College of Liberal Arts (1935) and editor ofThe Philippine Social Science Review (from 1936), while continuing to teachcourses on pre-historic Philippines and the Philippine Revolution. As ahistory professor, he had many students, although only two of them –Gregorio F. Zaide and Teodoro A. Agoncillo — devoted their energies to thefervent study of history, and both moved on to present history fromcontrasting vantage points. Another pensionado, Conrado Benitez, wasFernandez’s contemporary and town mate. Trained at the University ofChicago, Benitez became a teacher in the Philippine Normal School, deanof the UP College of Liberal Arts, and the first Filipino chairperson of theEconomics Department of the said college. Ginn & Co. also published hiswork, History of the Philippines: Economic, Social, Political (1926), written inaccordance with the Director of Education’s circular. This book was used inthe curriculum of the Manila North High School (now Arellano) from whereAgoncillo, who later became Fernandez’s student in UP, graduated(Agoncillo, 1976:22-28). The circular stated the need to publish a textbookthat will present a balanced assessment of all those who contributed to theeconomic development of the archipelago, which required a factual text (abook that can be covered in one semester) that is not inclined to a particularpoint of view or a discussion of issues which could only end up as accusa-tions and complaints (Benitez, 1926:iii). Benitez said that he adopted asomewhat chronological and thematic presentation in his book (Benitez,1926:iv). In his periodization or his discussion of events in different periods,he was guided by the study of the collaborationist T.H. Pardo de Taveraentitled, Results of the Economic Development of the Philippines, and Manuel deAzcarraga y Palmero’s, La libertad de comercio de las islas Filipinas (Freedomof Commerce in the Philippine Islands).


Conrado Benitez is the younger brother of Francisco Benitez (1887-1951), who was also well-known in the field of teaching, especially after heearned his BS in Education in 1910 as a pensionado in Western IllinoisTeachers College. He became the dean of UP’s College of Education from1918 until his death in 1951. For his contributions in promoting education inthe Philippines, Columbia University awarded F. Benitez with a medal in1929. He married a popular writer in English named Paz Marquez (1894-1983), who wrote the short story Dead Stars and edited the Philippine Journalof Education, which published L.H. Fernandez’s “The Formation of FilipinoNationality.”

Jorge Bocobo was a year older than F. Benitez. Bocobo was born inGerona, Tarlac on October 19, 1886 and died in 1965. He earned his degreefrom the Indiana University in 1907, passed the bar examinations in 1910before he became an instructor in UP. Later on he became a professor anddean of the UP College of Law. A member of four missions (1919-1924) thatvisited the US to peacefully demand for independence, Bocobo helped writeQuezon’s speech which upheld Philippine independence. He also pub-lished two books, For Freedom and Dignity and General Wood and the Law,which deal with the significance of autonomy for the archipelago. Hetranslated into English Rizal’s Noli and Fili, the national anthem as well asBonifacio’s Mga Katungkulang Gagawin ng mga Anak ng Bayan (The Duties ofthe Children of the Motherland). The primary author of the Civil Code of thePhilippines, Bocobo was named as the fifth president of UP (1934), Secretaryof Public Education (1939), and judge in the Supreme Court from 1942 until1944. In what some considered as a fiery speech (1921) to UP students, hetackled the dangers of what he called as “college ‘uneducation’” that couldpossibly result from the following reasons: “1.) Book-Worship; 2.) Profes-sional Philistinism; 3.) Misguided Zeal” (Bocobo, 1928:252-254). Bocobowas not a Tagalog writer, although he inserted this Tagalog phrase “Luma-bis ang karunungan mo” in his speech, which he did not fail to translate intoEnglish as “Your learning is too much.” It was addressed to students whoonly worshipped their books, which Bocobo said, hindered the develop-ment of healthy reasoning and clarity of thinking. He also suggested thesystematic reading of literature which could be taken to refer to the melodi-ous poems “The Eve of St. Agnes” and “Ode on a Grecian Urn” by JohnKeats (1795-1821), the English poet who said, “A thing of beauty is a joyforever,” which may not make sense to a simple teacher like Juan dela Cruz,the ordinary person or Filipino, who is usually branded as “ignorant.” Intruth, the Filipino is intelligent because he understands the mysteries of life;Juan dela Cruz (Filipino) is blessed with joy based on a profound under-standing of the purpose and meaning of life. He is humble. Simple butstrong, his uncompromising values are enough to shame the so-called “edu-


cated.” In times of crisis, his resilience will definitely receive the highestpraise. And his great love for his home is the very foundation of our socialstructure. More importantly, his patriotism has already been tried andtested. But the problem is that all these were articulated by the author in alanguage that cannot be understood by ordinary Filipinos, the Filipinos inthe streets, factories, fields and countryside. Once, Bocobo also contradictedhimself when he declared as Secretary of Public Education, that no otherforeign language, be it English or Spanish or another, might serve as a truevehicle of the effective expression of the Filipinos’ thoughts and sentiments(Hayden, 1972:592). That no foreign language can be used as an expressionof the national soul and spirit. He opposed denationalization (Hayden,1972:595) that might eventually destroy a people laboring to own a foreignlanguage. Bocobo published in 1951 an anthology in English entitledFurrows and Arrows: Poetry and Verse wherein he included the poem “ThePublic Elementary School (Bocobo, 1951:44)”6 that reflected the importancehe put on the public school as a vehicle for progress.

Not all the pensionados agreed with Jorge Bocobo’s “theory of denationa-lization (Hayden, 1972).” Camilo Osias (born in Bacnotan, La Union in 1889;died in Manila in 1976) and Maximo M.Kalaw (born in Lipa, Batangas in1891; died in Calapan, Oriental Mindoro in 1955), the primary leaders ineducation and politics of their generation (Hayden, 1972: 593), stood firm intheir position that the Filipino has the ability to express himself or herself notonly in the vernacular but also in a foreign language. For M.M. Kalaw, usagedetermines the ownership of a language, whether foreign or not. Thus, it ispossible to develop the national literature in a language other than Filipino,an endeavor initiated by Rizal and Fernando Ma. Guerrero (1873-1929), apopular Filipino poet who wrote in Spanish. In relation to English, Kalawsaid that it was still new to us, but there were already many works that canbe considered as part of nationalist literature, i.e., expressing our aspirationto be free and independent, written in this language. We can also own this

6. Following are excerpts from the said poem:

“Then Americans arrived and offeredPublic schools released from thralldom.

“Rizal’s dream is now a reality,In every public school are taught

“Precious democracy and libertyFrom which our great heroes have fought.

“In these schools the rich and the poor childrenHave the same opportunity

“To enter the door, free and wide open,Unto righteous prosperity” …


language in the same way that the ilustrados of the 19th century owned theSpanish language. It is not surprising to hear such statements from a formerpensionado from Georgetown University and George Washington Univer-sity whose fundamental skill or training was in English. In the Philippines,Kalaw was appointed to the following positions: associate editor of TheManila Times, then dean of the UP College of Liberal Arts, professor andpresident of the Political Science Department, and Secretary of PublicEducation (1945) in Sergio Osmeña’s cabinet. He was also named to the FirstIndependence Mission to the US in 1919, and adviser to the Osmeña-RoxasMission (“Os-Rox”) that succeeded in obtaining the Hare-Hawes CuttingIndependence Law in 1932. Kalaw was also elected as representative ofBatangas province to the National Convention. He wrote for the "PhilippinePolitical Science Series," whose first two volumes published his works, TheDevelopment of Philippine Politics, 1872-1920 (Manila, 1926, 491 pp.), andPhilippine Government Under the Jones Law: An Account of ContemporaryPhilippine Government and Politics (Manila, 1927, 502 pp.). The former dis-cusses the history of the role played by political parties and Filipino leadersin the political development of the Philippines. It seems it was the first workwhich gave due consideration to the "Period of Suppressed Nationalism" (inChapter IX). He dedicated the latter work to Judge George A. Malcolm, thefirst chairperson of the Political Science Department, UP. Perhaps in re-sponse to Bocobo’s call to also focus on the development of the arts andliterature to avoid what he calls “fetish of specialization” or endless fixationon specialization, Maximo Kalaw wrote an historical novel entitled TheFilipino Rebel (1927), a protest against the political structure established bythe American administration from 1898 to 1927. The principal objective ofthe book, in the opinion of a known critic (Mojares, 1983:340-341), was todestroy what was referred to as “political materialism,” i.e., the destructionof the political ethic when Filipino leaders sided with and eventually joinedthe new colonial structure. This worsened when they conspired, resorted tocheating and deception for personal and factional power. Maximo Kalawresumed the project shelved by his elder brother Teodoro when he workedon the translation of Rizal’s letters that are contained in the six-volumeEpistolario Rizalino. For Bocobo’s part, as mentioned earlier, he translatedNoli me tangere and El filibusterismo which were used when the Rizal Law(Republic Act 1425, enacted on June 12, 1956) was enforced. Through this,the pensionado, the new ilustrado, showed the continuing relationship, evenat the level of text and ideas, between them (americanized Filipinos) andRizal’s generation (hispanized Filipinos) who were both products of theencounter or meeting of East and West, of the conquered and the conquer-ors.


Camilo Osias retranslated Rizal’s novels to English in 1956, in his beliefthat the public preferred to read the English translation than the original inSpanish or its Tagalog version (e.g., Patricio Mariano). A pensionado at threeacademic institutions in the US – Western Illinois Teachers College, Univer-sity of Chicago and Columbia University—Osias returned to the Philip-pines, taught in high school before he was appointed as the AssistantDirector of the Ministry of Education, and the first president of the NationalUniversity in 1921. He was elected as senator (1928) and named as Philip-pine resident commissioner to Washington, DC (1929). Osias’ book TheFilipino Way of Life (Boston, 1940) is considered to contain the most fair andmost critical assessment of the Filipino identity (Hayden, 1972:864). Astudent of the Thomasites, Osias believed that the public schools, as a toolfor societal change, represent the path towards progress (May, 1984:123).He became more popular because of his Philippine Readers I to IV (or “OsiasReaders”) which were used in the primary and intermediate schools all overthe country (Almario, et al., 1994:87-88). Those textbooks (with illustrationsby Fernando Amorsolo) were completed at the end of the 1920s when Osiaswas still a superintendent of the public schools. In fact, he was the firstFilipino to be appointed to such a key government position. In his publica-tions, he also focused on Rizal, religion, and education. In his essay,“Nationality and Education (Hilario and Quirino, 1927:241-250),” he pre-sented the goals that should guide the administration of education: nation-alism that is not equated with xenophobia, democracy that stands for theenlightenment of the masses (not anarchy that suppresses and brainwashesthe people’s minds and beliefs), and cosmopolitanism/internationalism,which means harmonizing the culture and civilization of East and West. Italso entails understanding a world ethic appropriate to the sensibility of apeople who have grown weary of war. Filipinos are virtual citizens of theworld because of their religion. Such status was further advanced becausethe English language facilitated easier communication of Filipinos with theUS, England and other countries colonized by it. English is the language offreedom because it was used in the disarmament conference held in the US.In his conclusion, Osias did not fail to mention that the dynamic nationalistobjective remained as the most important concern of all. As for his statementon democracy, this can be compared with the statement of Francisco A.Delgado that the pensionados’ only aspiration was to put into practice allover the country the democratic aspirations and goals that they learned inthe US (Dery, 1995:174).7

7. Dery (1995:174) described him as "... Delgado, a 1903 pensionado who later occupied highpositions in the government." Among his contemporaries were Liborio Gomez, a pathologist(born in Sto. Tomas, Pampanga on July 23, 1887; died on January 10, 1958) and PotencianoGuazon, surgeon (born in Baliwag, Bulacan on May 19, 1883; died in Baguio on March 24,1924).


Juan C. Laya (1911-1952), a native of San Manuel, Pangasinan, alsorealized the importance of English, and because of this he went to the US tospecialize in this language in Indiana University. He taught from 1932 to1936 in Manila East high School (now V. Mapa) and this experience seemedto have motivated him to write a workbook and a study plan and manual forteaching English. He worked on this from 1936 to 1938 for the Ministry ofEducation. He was also appointed as English superintendent in Pangasinanand Cebu in 1941. After the war, he was named as principal of Arellano HighSchool (Manila North), and later on, as superintendent of public schools inBataan. Laya wrote His Native Soil8 while he was a pensionado in Indiana. Itwon first prize in the novel category in the First Literary Contest sponsoredby the Commonwealth Government in 1940.

“The Return” is the novel’s dominant theme that can be easily com-pared to Rizal’s Noli me tangere, with the return of Juan Crisostomo Ibarra yMagsalin to the Philippines to push for radical changes in the colony‘seducational system, after a long period of stay in Europe. This will first beimplemented by building modern schools, like those in Germany, in thetown of San Diego that in truth was a stronghold of frailocracia. His NativeSoil delved on the return and eventual separation of Martin Romero, the“modern Ibarra/Ilustrado,” a BSBA graduate of the University of Washing-ton in the US, from his native town of Flores, in the province of Pangasinan.Romero was disturbed by what he saw as the "stagnant" way of life in histown, which seems to thrive on superstition and the backward thinking ofthe townspeople as embodied in their faith in traditional healers. He triedto introduce some changes in the typical agrarian community by applyingbusiness principles that he learned in the US. He put up a company orbusiness called “Romero Mercantile,” which he established together withhis family and relatives who were all Ilocano migrants. In the end, thecompany floundered and was shut down because it was strikingly foreignand incompatible with the prevailing system in a community ruled byfeudal consciousness and forces. Martin’s decision to leave Flores perhapsalso mirrored his decision to abandon the culture of his birthplace, and tosearch for an identity that is more attuned with the spirit and motivationsof western capitalism.

English is undoubtedly the language of His Native Soil, although theattempt to use the local context can be discerned from the Ilocano phrasesthat occasionally crop up in the text, and four lines from the Tagalog folksong Aking Bituin (My Star) (Laya, 1972:297). Laya cultivated a deeperinterest in, if not obsession with, the language of his wife Silvina del Carmen,

8. See N.V. Teodoro (1998) for an analysis of this work.


a Tagala, and from then on, he started to write plays in Tagalog, includingSa Sariling Lupa (His Native Soil) (1943), based on his prize-winning novel.He also edited Diwang Kayumanggi (The Filipino Spirit), a four-volumetextbook that was used for a long period of time in Pilipino classes in publichigh schools across the country. Laya was appointed as the first non-Tagalog member of the Surian ng Wikang Pambansa (SWP, or NationalLanguage Institute), after the publication of his Basic Tagalog Vocabulary in1947. He did continue to write in English. This Barangay (1950), his secondnovel, tackled the experience of the Filipinos in Pangasinan during theJapanese occupation. This Barangay reads like a work of local history, andit unravels like a “travelogue” of the towns of Lingayen, Pozzorubio, Car-men, Rosales, Sual, Umingan and Binalonan, where one meets the people ofPangasinan, the Lakays, Apos, Manangs and Manongs, who also figure in theliterary works of Carlos Bulosan.

The Journey of the “Pinoy” Worker

It was a different America that Carlos (“Allos”) Bulosan, a worker, a“Pinoy,” who migrated to the US following the crash of the stock market inOctober 1929, experienced compared to the safe and comfortable world ofthe pensionados.9 Westerners, said Bulosan, were raised to believe thatpeople from the East or people of color are weak and puny, if not deservingof endless vilification.10 Thus, it verges on the comical that Filipinos weretaught to consider themselves as equals to the Americans by adhering towestern aspirations and adjusting to the American way of life. The ideal ofbrotherhood or fellowship with the white race was shattered by the painfulexperiences of Bulosan and other Filipino workers in the US.

In California during the 1930s, there were about 30,000 Filipino seasonalworkers who tried to live a normal and peaceful life (Evangelista, 1985:3).Between the end of spring and the start of the summer season, they pickedlettuce, strawberries and asparagus in California. Then they traveled north-wards to Seattle to transfer to Alaska to work in the salmon canneries insummer. During the fall season, they picked apples in Washington, thenthey harvested green peas in California in wintertime. During the coldest

9. Among the sources on the life and works of Bulosan are: Bulosan (1978; 1977, 1960),Evangelista (1985), San Juan, Jr. (1972), and L.V. Teodoro, Jr. (1985).

10. “Western peoples were brought up to regard Orientals or colored peoples as inferior, butthe mockery of it all is that Filipinos are taught to regard Americans as our equals. Adheringto American ideals, living American life, these are contributory to our feeling of equality. Theterrible truth in America shatters the Filipinos’ dreams of fraternity” (Bulosan, 1960:191).


months of winter, the “Pinoys” flocked to Los Angeles and San Franciscowhere they worked in hotels as porters, bus conductors, waiters anddishwashers in restaurants. In Bulosan’s case, upon his arrival in Seattle in1931, he was sold for $5 to a contractor, and thereafter labored in salmoncanneries under exploitative conditions (San Juan, Jr., 1984a:5). The pitifulconditions of “Asiatic” workers at the time are described in a testimony bya Filipino worker (Cruz, 1933):

“We work very hard…like slaves until night and sometimes we arecalled to work beyond the standard hours. They pay three cents tothose who can finish 168 cans, while others are paid 15 cents perhour… We were housed in poor and cramped places, given littlefood—salted fish or meat and rice—supplied by the contractor.They feed us with salmon only when the contractor's food supplyruns out …”

The condition of Filipino workers worsened as the economic crisisdeteriorated further. The number of unemployed workers swelled. And thewhites, who shunned agricultural work before the economic crisis peaked,suddenly treated migrant workers as competitors for scarce work. Povertyintensified and so did violence in the form of racist attacks. Foreign workerswere rounded up and driven out en masse from the plantations. Suchviolent evictions are part of the history of “Pinoy” workers in YakimaValley, Washington, DC (Evangelista, 1985:4). And the systematic elimina-tion of competition for work spread further and became a commonplacephenomenon in the 1930s. It further intensified with the “importation ofworkers” from the colonies. The overall decline in wages was blamed on allthe workers in the American West Coast, who were actually forced to acceptlow pay because of the difficult situation and widespread unemployment.In their unrelenting stand for the right to strike, Filipino workers werearrested, imprisoned, shot at, and threatened with deportation or chargedas abusive and violators of the many restrictions imposed on them as a“foreign race” in America.11

11. San Juan, Jr. (1996:62) said, "“… neither protected wards nor citizens, they were subjectedto various forms of racist discrimination and exclusion, circumscribed by (among others) lawsof antimiscegenation and prohibited from employment in government and from ownershipof land … Neither citizens nor strictly aliens then, Filipino “nationals” (mostly males) sufferedclass, national, and racial oppression directed by agribusiness functionaries or administeredby technocratic state bureaucracies – the legislature, the courts, and the police. Categorized inthis irreconcilable alterity, Filipinos endured as victims of exploitation perpetrated by laborcontractors, farmers, gamblers, racist vigilantes, and by state laws…”


Destroyed by what E. San Juan, Jr. (1996:62) termed as “deterrito-rialization,” the members of the established “internal colony” in the USfought to survive while repeatedly asserting their right and dignity aspersons. E. San Juan, Jr. said that they created an inclusive and rich cultureof protest, struggle and unionism that linked the Mother Country (wherethey were deprived of a rightful place) and the metropolitan power (wherethey were treated as a commodity). The first associations of Filipino workersin Hawaii in 1919 are reminiscent of the different social movements thatemerged throughout the archipelago. In 1920 and 1924, the Filipino Federa-tion of Labor led the uprising supported by workers from different ethnicgroups and industries. In 1934, the Filipino Workers Association wasfounded in California, composed of about 2,000-strong members who sup-ported the strike in Salinas, El Centro, Vacaville, and the cotton plantationsin San Joaquin Valley, California, which Bulosan did not fail to mention inhis autobiographical work, America is in the Heart (1943).12 The book alsomentioned the significant role played by the United Cannery, Agricultural,Packing and Allied Workers of America (UCAPAWA) in uniting agricul-tural and industrial workers, and its cooperation with the Committee for theProtection of Filipino Rights (CPFR) (Bulosan, 1977:285). It was also be-lieved that the Filipino communists led the strikes and uprisings that werelaunched (Bulosan, 1977:279). Meanwhile, two militant unionists — ChrisD. Mensalvas and Ernesto Mangaong — faced the penalty of deportationbecause of their radical but legitimate participation in the workers’ move-ment. With regard to this, Bulosan wrote, I Want the Wide American Earth13

12. “This reservoir of experience eventually enabled the Filipino Agricultural WorkersOrganizing Committee to lead the historic grape strike of 1965, the matrix of what became theUnited Farm Workers of America…” (E. San Juan, Jr., 1996)

13. Following are a few lines from the militant poem (Evangelista, 1985:88-91):“You cannot frighten us with your bombs and deaths;You cannot drive us away from our land with your hate and disease;You cannot command us with your nothing,Because you are nothing but nothing;You cannot put us all in your padded jails;You cannot snatch the dawn of life from us!”

“Before the brave, before the proud builders and workers,I say I want the wide American earthFor all the free.I want the wide American earth for my people,I want my beautiful land.I want it with my rippling strength and tendernessOf love and light and truthFor all the free –”


which the UCAPAWA distributed in the hope of raising funds that can beused for the defense of Mensalvas and Mangaong. Ordinary readers as wellas “friends of democracy,” whose social consciousness was further fannedby the liberating message of the poem, gave generous financial support.

Bulosan also took part in the Congress of Industrial Organizations(CIO). In 1934, he edited The New Tide, a proletarian magazine that broughthim closer to the world of progressive writers: Richard Wright, WilliamSaroyan, William Carlos Williams, Louis Adamic, and others (San Juan, Jr.,1996:64). He also wrote for the Philippine Commonwealth Times and the twonewspapers in Stockton and Salinas. His articles centered on the problemsof Filipino migrant workers. From 1936 to 1938, Bulosan read the works ofBalzac, Neruda, Nazim Hikmet, Steinbeck, Gorky, Marx, Whitman, NicolasGuillen, Gandhi, Shaw, Rizal and other writers who were socially commit-ted, and he also read such publications as New Masses, The New Republic andNation (San Juan, Jr., 1996). Bulosan also acknowledged the significantinfluence of Marxist ideology on literary criticism (Bulosan, 1960:272). Healso thought of publishing a magnum opus about Rizal (Bulosan, 1960:237).In 1944, Harcourt, Brace & Co. published his collection of short stories aboutthe Filipino experience, The Laughter of My Father. It was also in the US wherehis books of poems were first published, Chorus for America (Los Angeles:Wagon & Star, 1942), Letter from America (Prairie City, Illinois: J.A. Dexter,1942) and The Voice of Bataan (New York: Coward McCann, 1943). Some ofthe products of his creative imagination can also be read in the pages of TheNew Yorker (1944), Common Ground (1949), Alive Magazine (1977), AmerasiaJournal (1979), A Treasury of American Laughter, Best American Stories of 1945and Prose and Poetry of the World. Bulosan’s name is listed in America’s Who’sWho as well as the International Who’s Who.

While in Washington, DC in 1943, Bulosan declined Quezon’s offer forhim to work in his staff or entourage (Bulosan, 1960:188). Bulosan thus hadthe opportunity to escape the cruel world of the “Pinoy” workers wrackednow and again by racist labels and actions that brutalized his personhood.But Bulosan did not avail of this opportunity because he chose to devote histime and attention, as a writer and union activist, to continue his involve-ment and solidarity with the collective strivings of fellow Filipino workersin the US.

“End” of the Journey

In the “wide American earth” that every “Pinoy” worker dreamed of, beinga Filipino was considered a crime and because of this, the “criminal” mustflee from the grave crime — of being a Filipino in America — something that


he never considered.14 Bulosan said that he could never forget the sufferingshe went through in the US as a victim of mindless racism which only fueledchaos and violence. The word Filipino evoked a sharp and deep wound, aword that had assumed negative connotations in the racist ideology of thetime, which was also widespread in Europe (Bulosan, 1960:206). In spite ofthe baggage that being Filipino entailed, Bulosan said that he did not regretthat he was born as one. Because of this, he never considered acquiring therights of an American citizen (Bulosan, 1960:273). Bulosan remained aFilipino until his death, from pulmonary disease (Bulosan, 1960:274-275),in King County Hospital, Seattle, Washington, on September 11, 1956.

He was not able to return to his native land, nor did he marry and havehis own family during his stay in America. He wanted to visit the Philip-pines but he also doubted if he could still return to the US afterwards.Bulosan also wondered if he would see his relatives (Bulosan, 1960:273) inthe barrio of Mangusmana, Binalonan, Pangasinan, where he was born onNovember 24, 1913. Like all Filipinos driven by poverty and feudal oppres-sion in the colony (San Juan, Jr., 1984a:3), Bulosan, at the age of 17, left thebarrio of Mangusmana during the great depression, hoping for a better life— through thrift, industry and sacrifice—in the land of America where hearrived on July 22, 1930.

“Pinoy” workers generally had very limited education. They knew littleEnglish. Bulosan, for example, only had three if not six years (McWilliams,1977:xx; Quirino, 1995:51) of formal education before he went to the US. Helearned English by diligently reading books in public libraries in California,and later became a writer and spokesperson for the thousands of “Pinoy”workers in the US. The role he played is vastly different from the role playedby the pensionados, who returned to the Philippines with their Americandegrees and diplomas, to take part in promoting the cultural process ofamericanization, a form of “pluralizing process,” which was mentioned byCamilo Osias in his The Filipino People and the Human Family (Roseburg,1956:166-169). Bulosan himself also became a part of this process. Heexpressed his feelings not in the vital, vivid Filipino language but in English,the language of capitalism (which he referred to as the “gangster economy”( Bulosan, 1960:221), the language of a world being destroyed by “civilizedbrutality” (Bulosan, 1960:219). Because of this, he truly felt what it was liketo be an exile, especially in the cruel and violent sector of American society,where “Pinoys” were constantly suspected as bad elements. The vitality ofthe “Pinoy’s” mind and life was robbed from him with the destruction of hishumanity and separation from the culture of his birth. Bulosan compared

14. “… I feel like a criminal running away from a crime I did not commit. And the crime is thatI am a Filipino in America” (Bulosan, 1960:199).


the “Pinoy” to Rizal who seemed like a leaf — though it may be without atear, it has been completely severed from the “mother tree” (Bulosan,1960:221).

Nonetheless, Bulosan always persevered to ease the pain of beinguprooted. In his works, he never failed to write about events, the socialmilieu, and facets of the country’s history and culture such as basi, kilin,doayen, palang, peddlers of boggoong, Igorot g-string, Colorum, the uprisingin Tayug, kundiman, the impoverished farmers, Lam-ang, and many others.In his only novel, The Power of the People (ca. 1950-1956),15 published only in1977, he tackled the “revolutionary journey” of a group of guerillas belong-ing to the Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan (HMB) or Huk, at the end of the1940s in the Philippines. He was probably influenced by Luis Taruc’s Bornof the People (New York: International Publishers, 1953). The group wassupposed to meet with a certain Felix Rivas, a Filipino expatriate from theUS, who was tasked to deliver money and other goods in support of the massmovement. Although Rivas’ character did not surface in the novel, the storyabout his experience closely parallels the life of Bulosan in the US. Itsuggests that the author saw himself in the person of Rivas as an expatriatewho returned to his country, even if it is only in the realm of fiction, tosupport the peasant wars from 1948 to 1950, in which Dante, a “returning”expatriate, a former “Pinoy” worker in the US, participated. From the US,in 1952, Bulosan reaffirmed his support for radical movements such as theCongress of Labor Organization (CLO) (San Juan, Jr., 1984a:3) led by AmadoV. Hernandez, who diligently struggled to end US intervention and abuse,in pursuit of national independence and the restoration of democratic rightsin the country.

REFERENCES

Agoncillo, Teodoro1980 Ang Pilipinas at ang Mga Pilipino: Noon at Ngayon. Quezon City: R.P. Garcia Publishing

Co., Inc.

1976 “Student Activism of the 1930s,” Solidarity, July-August, X(4):22-28.

Agoncillo, Teodoro and Milagros C. Guerrero1977 History of the Filipino People. Quezon City: R.P. Garcia Publishing Co., Inc.

15. San Juan, Jr. (n.d.) analyzed this work.


Almario, Virgilio, et al., eds.1994 Bumasa at Lumaya: A Sourcebook on Children’s Literature in the Philippines. Pasig City:

Anvil Publishing Inc.

Alzona, Encarnacion1956 El legado de España a Filipinas. Manila: University of the Philippines Press.

1932 A History of Education in the Philippines, 1565-1930. Manila: University of the Philip-pines Press.

Benitez, Conrado1926 History of the Philippines: Economic, Social, Political. Boston: Ginn and Company.

Bocobo, Jorge1951 Furrows and Arrows: Poetry and Verse. Manila: Colcol and Company.

1928 “College Uneducation.” In Thinking for Ourselves: A Collection of Representative FilipinoEssays, Second edition. Edited by V. Hilario and E. Quirino. Manila: Oriental Commer-cial Company, Inc.

Bulosan, Carlos1978 The Philippines is in the Heart. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.

1977 America is in the Heart: A Personal History. Seattle and London: University of Washing-ton Press.

1960 “Sound of Falling Light: Letters in Exile.” Edited by D.S. Feria, The Diliman Review,January-September, 8(1-3):185-277.

Camagay, Ma. Luisa1997 “Women Pensionados: Purveyors of Modernization Among Filipino Women,” Diliman

Review, 45(2-3):20-25.

1996 Encarnacion Alzona: An Anthology. Quezon City: Office of Research Coordination,University of the Philippines.

Constantino, Renato1975 The Philippines: A Past Revisited. Quezon City: Tala Publishing Services.

Corpuz, Onofre D.1967 “Education and Socio-Economic Change in the Philippines, 1870-1960’s,” Philippine

Social Sciences and Humanities Review, 32(2):193-268.

Cruz, Emeterio C.1933 “Filipino Life in the Alaskan Fish Canneries,” Philippine Magazine, June.

Cruz, Romeo1974 America’s Colonial Desk and The Philipines, 1898-1934. Quezon City: University of the

Philippines Press.


Dery, Luis C.1995 The Army of the First Philippine Republic and Other Historical Essays. Manila: De La Salle

University Press.

Evangelista, Susan1985 Carlos Bulosan and His Poetry: A Biography and Anthology. Quezon City: Ateneo de

Manila University Press.

Fernandez, Leandro H.1919 A Brief History of the Philippines. Boston: Ginn and Company.

Hayden, Joseph Ralston1972 The Philippines: A Study in National Development. New York: Arno Press.

Hilario, Vicente and Eliseo Quirino, eds.1927 Thinking for Ourselves: A Collection of Representative Filipino Essays. Manila: Oriental

Commercial Company, Inc.

Kalaw, Maximo M.1927 Philippine Government Under the Jones Law. Manila: Oriental Commercial Company,

Inc.

1926 The Development of Philippine Politics, 1872-1920. Manila: Oriental Commercial Co., Inc.

Laya, Juan C.1972 His Native Soil. Quezon City: Kayumanggi Publishers.

1954 This Barangay. Manila: Inang Wika Publishing.

Lumbera, Bienvenido and Cynthia N. Lumbera1982 Philippine Literature: A History and Anthology. Manila: National Bookstore.

Lumbera, Cynthia N. and Teresita G. Maceda, eds.1983 Rediscovery: Essays on Philippine Life and Culture. Manila: National Bookstore

Manuel, E. Arsenio1970 Dictionary of Philippine Biography. Volume II. Quezon City: Filipiniana Publications.

1955 A Dictionary of Philippine Biography. Volume I. Quezon City: Filipiniana Publications.

May, Glenn Anthony1984 Social Engineering in the Philippines: The Aims, Execution and Impact of American Colonial

Policy, 1900-1913. Quezon City: New Day Publishers.

McWilliams, Carey1977 “Introduction.” In America is in the Heart: A Personal History. Seattle and London:

University of Washington Press.

Mojares, Resil


1983 Origins and Rise of the Filipino Novel: A Generic Study of the Novel until 1940. Quezon City:University of the Philippines Press.

Olivar, Celia Bacobo1950 “The First Pensionados: An Appraisal of their Contributions to the National Welfare.”

Unpublished MA thesis in Education, University of the Philippines, Quezon City.

Quirino, Carlos1995 Who’s Who in Philippine History. Manila: Tahanan Books.

Roseburg, Arturo G.1956 Essays: English, American and Filipino. Manila: Alemar’s.

San Juan, Epifanio Jr.1996 History and Form: Selected Essays. Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University Press.

1984a Bulosan: An Introduction with Selections. Manila: National Book Store.

1984b Toward a People’s Literature: Essays in the Dialectics and Contradiction in PhilippineWriting. Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press.

1972 Carlos Bulosan and the Imagination of the Class Struggle. Quezon City: University of thePhilippines Press.

n.d. “The Filipino People Against the U.S. Imperialism: The Example of Carlos Bulosan.”In The Power of the People. Guelph, Ontario: Tabloid Books.

Santillan, Neil Martial and Mary Bernadette P. Conde, eds.1998 Kasaysayan at Kamalayan: Mga Piling Akda ukol sa Diskursong Pangkasaysayan. Quezon

City: Limbagang Pangkasaysayan.

Taguiwalo, Judy M.1997 “Dalawang Mukha ng Pakikibaka ng Kababaihan sa Panahon ng Kolonyal na Pagha-

hari ng Estados Unidos sa Pilipinas,” Diliman Review, 45(2-3):30-38.

Teodoro, Luis Jr.1985 “Notes on The Power of the People: Towards Coming to Terms with Philippine Exile

Literature,” Mithi, 1:3-14.

Documents

Pensionados and Workers: The Filipinos in the United States, 1903