Book 56 out of 200 books
"Banaag at Sikat" or "From Early Dawn to Full Light" (in English) by Lope K. Santos

"Banaag at Sikat" explores the social conditions and injustice of the Philippines , early into the American occupation era.

MY THOUGHTS:
I am going to write this review in English, but that is a more unimportant fact. I d some parts of the book but disd most of the book for being too long in explaining the human conditions that it is nearly unnecessary.

We have Felipe and Delfin. One promotes socialism and the other detests it. One was the capitalist businessman, one was the poor farmer. So which should you choose?

I am not going to write as much for this book review. Because, as I have said, the book is boring in a lot of times.philippine-history philippine-literature1 Radzmer1 review1 follower

i really need to read this book because this much more mean to me infact these book is my project in filipino.....
1 Gabriela Francisco507 13

"The time of the great West has passed. Now it is the time for the East to rise from the shadows."

There has been a movement over the past few decades, a call to replace Jose Rizal's NOLI ME TANGERE and EL FILIBUSTERISMO in the school curriculum with this book. When I first heard of this several years ago, I remember promising to myself that, should the time come for an English translation to come out, I'd read it and find out why some folks think this is better than Ibarra and Simoun for our youth to read in class.

Fast forward the first Philippine Book Festival, where I found a copy at the Penguin SEA stall!

I dove into the novel in a comparative frame of mind, and could see a lot of similarities with the Rizal novels.

We have lovers from different social classes, a clash between haves and have-nots, characters who STAND FOR SOMETHING and have unnatural dialogues awkwardly set up as mini-debates about the pros and cons of socialism and the evils of inherited wealth.

In both novels we have the heights of the infamous Malay passion that are obvious predecessors to the melodramatic plots of teleseryes today.

Now the differences.

Rizal's novels served to unite Filipinos in their ire against the foreign oppressor.

Santos' novel, in contrast, seeks to set Filipinos against each other: the laborer versus his boss, the proletariat versus the bourgeois.

This is obviously the work of a very young man (Santos was in his early twenties when he wrote it in 1906). It reeks of dangerous idealism, untried, untested, impractical and impossible to implement.

I'll admit it was an interesting read, but only in the historic sense. This was, after all, only a few years after the death of Rizal. We had just exchanged one foreign oppressor for another. This was written before history had shown that the great experiment of socialism/communism was doomed to fail, before the Russian revolution and Stalin's infamous famine, before Mao's Cultural Revolution.

But in terms of the elements of "good literature," this book falls short and is one of those books that became famous because it was among the first of its kind, and not on the strength of its literary merit.

People fall in love at a glance. If this was meant to be a romance mixed with political propaganda, the lovers' dialogues are trite and nonsensical. One can predict what will happen in the plot chapters away. And the characters are obviously personifications of social classes, they do not change and seem unrealistic individuals. The supposed hero and heroine's chief virtue seem to be hard headedness and not any other nobility in spirit.

The author is pedantic at times:

"From the way the two sisters dressed that day, the female guests saw how funny and ugly it was to borrow clothes from other lands, and how beautiful it was to wear dresses that belonged to one's own people. They learned that not all that was good in Europe or the United States should be borrowed and imitated by Filipinos. Whether in clothes or character traits, we should only borrow those elements that would not destroy what was beautiful in our own country and race..."

Rizal's novels, therefore, emerge superior not only in literary style, but also because of their characters. True, they are symbols, but Rizal managed to imbue them with a sense of epic majesty that captures the imagination. And his characters change. Ibarra becomes Simoun, and becomes something else towards the end.

In this regard, Banaag at Sikat fails to approach the standard that Rizal set. This teacher would support a movement to include it in the curriculum, but not to replace Noli and Fili completely. Michael DavidAuthor 2 books78

I planned on reading Banaag at Sikat once it had been translated to English. First, I am not a native Tagalog speaker or reader and am more competent in English. I was fortunate that it was translated by one of my esteemed professors, and most excellently at that. It’s been almost twenty years since I’ve been under his tutelage and he never stopped practicing what he taught: avoid logorrhea, because it is always better to be understood.

Sir Danton exemplified this belief in his Penguin (!) translation of Banaag and Sikat. I would have quit reading this novel in the original Tagalog, because the novel is bloated. I understand that Lope K. Santos used his main characters as his mouthpiece, but the novel is quite excessive. Even with Sir Danton’s limpid and lively translation, the novel sags with the weight of its own ideas that were perfunctorily integrated into it.

I recall Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle, which was sooty and depressing, but a lot more poignant. Rather than fixating upon talking about the concept of socialism, Upton Sinclair showed the horrible work conditions inside a meatpacking plant. Although roughly of the same length, I felt that Jungle was a lot more cohesive than Banaag at Sikat.

Banaag at Sikat has the same afflictions as Rizal’s two novels: as novels of ideas, the plot seemed too patchwork with egregious transitions. Rizal’s advantage was that he was one of the first writers of such a Philippine novel. Even near the end, new characters were also introduced that point to Filipinos being marginalized. Although much is obsolete with the novel, Santos hit the nail on the head when he showed that a lot of the problems in the Filipino is his inability to keep his dick in his pants. Almost all of the problems of the novel could have been resolved with abstinence or deliberation.

The novel’s antagonist, Don Ramon, is the father of the female protagonist. He is rich, entitled, and very much a caricature of the Filipino landowner during the time. He beats his workers, women, and makes money taking advantage of others. He's so one-dimensional that a straight line might have more depth.

The love stories at the heart of the novel represent the rich-poor dynamic. I'm just droning on, because there's really little to laud about the novel.

The most frustrating part of the novel was Santos talking about it being a socialist novel yet never really diving into its nuances: this can be contrasted with the rather explosive extreme that Simoun decided to realize in El Filibusterismo. Here, there's just whining and more whining.

Banaag at Sikat is more of a historical curio than a good novel. I am highly appreciative of the linguistic legerdemain that Sir Danton did with this novel, but even his lively translation can’t buoy the unevenness and bloat that this novel possesses.

If you have to read this novel, however, this is the definitive translation. If there's one thing I got from this novel, it showed me was sir Danton's interminable patience. If it was a chore to read, I can't imagine how much of a chore it was to expertly translate. Esperanza382 21

"Banaag at Sikat" by Lope K. Santos is a classic work of Philippine literature that serves as a significant piece in the country's literary and social history. Published in 1906, the novel is written in Tagalog and is considered one of the earliest novels in the language.

The title, "Banaag at Sikat," translates to "From Early Dawn to Full Light" in English. The novel is a social commentary that explores the struggles and aspirations of the Filipino working class during the early years of American colonization. Set against the backdrop of industrialization and societal changes, the narrative follows the lives of two main characters, Delfin and Felipe, as they navigate the challenges of a rapidly transforming society.

Lope K. Santos, a prominent figure in Philippine literature and language advocacy, used "Banaag at Sikat" to address issues of social injustice, exploitation, and the quest for national identity. The novel reflects the author's commitment to promoting the use of the national language and his desire to inspire social consciousness among readers.

"Banaag at Sikat" is not only a literary achievement but also a historical document that provides insights into the cultural and political landscape of the Philippines during the early 20th century. It remains a crucial and influential work, contributing to the rich tapestry of Filipino literature and serving as a reminder of the enduring pursuit of justice and social equity.filipino-authors Guelan22 1 follower

Nang walang pagtawad sa kahalagahan ng naturang nobela sa malinggatong na kasaysayan ng mga unyong manggagawa at Sosyalismo sa Filipinas, yaring “kathambuhay” bilang teksto ay buhay na buhay bilang sityo ng biyak na kamalayan ni Santos: bilang ideyologo(ng nakatutulig! makatanggal-tutuli!) at bilang natural na makata sa modong komiko. Kung ihahambing ang mga proselito — na nakapapagod! sukat maunawaan ko kung ba’t sila ibig busalan nina Don Ramon at Don Filemon sa batis ng Antipulo! — na sina Delfin at Felipe, kumpara sa mga buhay na buhay na personang sina Meni (huwaran sa pag-iyak at paghihimatay at pang-uuyam sa ligawan!), Julita, Nora Loleng, ang Ale ni Delfin (itong huling tatlo’y ilan sa pinakakatawa-tawang mga tauhan sa mga nobelang Filipinong nabasa ko na), at ang huli-ma’t-mahahabol-ding romantikong abenturerong si Ruperto at kaniyang kasing si Sela, walang maibabatbat ang paris ng mga ideologo sa parikala, kulay, at kasiningan nitong mga huli. Patunay na si Santos ay mapagpahiwatig sa komikong banghay ng nobela, at di-gasino sa madidiwarang diskurso ng samparis na bugnuting palaisip — aanhin ang payak at reduktibong agham-politika ni Santos kumpara sa yaman, estetika’t kubling politika ng kaniyang komiko-trahedyang talagang palaisipan at sakdal-katatatawanan, na lalong nabibida kay Mening walang kahulilip sa pagiging kasinta-sinta? Emilio27

Premise 5
Plot 5
Style 4
I consider this as OG, one of the pioneers. Lit in the 1900s. Deserves respect. May pagka teleserye but we know it got there first. Mainly about socialism in the time of American occupation wrapped in the characters' personal struggles. It was a product of its time, and so was the style and the way it was worded. Not meant to be compared to contemporary lit. emil461 27

FINALLY NABASA KO NA TO!!!! GANDA!!!!!!! Efraim Ampong1 review

Ampong Cyndee Bartolome1 review

Paano basahin to?!!!! Dannah Nicole1 reviewCurrently reading

i want to read it

Sophia Beltran1 review5

How can I read this? John Mark1 review

Its so amazing..i love it.This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.Show full review Wogie53

Ang mahabang nobelang ito'y napakaganda. Pinagsama-sama ang kwento ng pag-iibigang tunay nina Delfin at Meni, at nina Felipe at Tentay, ang pag-ibig nina Delfin at Felipe sa kanilang ideolohiya, ang pagdaralita ng mga anak ng bayan. Kapupulutan din ng maraming kaalaman hinggil sa lipunan.filipino-literature Janrose Ocampo1 review33 Want to read

yeyt Cate1 review

wala naman.. anu kaya 2 baliw lang ang peg
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.Show full review Violete1 reviewWant to read

I think I will this book. Rb Salonga1 reviewRead

Autor del comentario:
=================================