Igal or Pangalay?
Critique by Rosalie (Nannette) Matilac
I was appalled by the documents e-mailed to me by the Pesta Igal Secretariat regarding the performances set on 14-15 July 2010 at the UP Asian Center. The feeling came from the gut when I read the text from the organizers’ program, written by Dr. Matthew Santamaria: “Igal is dance to Sama or Sinama-speaking peoples…In the Philippines, it is considered a tradition all its own that has related variants such as the pangalay of the Tausug…”
Immediately, a Zen dictum on kindness crossed my mind: “Those who know kindness are few, those who abuse kindness are many.” In the field of intellectual property and creation, kindness can really be a rarity, especially when the little kindness one possesses is overpowered by other self-serving desires. I am referring to the attempt of Pesta Igal’s main organizers, headed by Dr. Matthew Santamaria, to copy the theories, concepts, and studies of Ligaya Fernando-Amilbangsa on the pangalay through an old advertising trick—re-branding.
I expected kindness and respect from Dr. Santamaria, the moving force behind the launching of Igal as dance tradition apart from Pangalay; after all, when Dr. Santamaria came to the parlor of pangalay researcher and conservationist, Ms. Ligaya Fernando-Amilbangsa, he knew nothing about the dances of the Sulu Archipelago. That was in 1999, when, through my prodding, Ms. Amilbangsa began teaching again after a period of semi-retirement. I was among the first batch of the 1999 class, and became a witness to the entry of Matthew Santamaria as a pangalay student, fresh from his stay in Japan. I saw how Ms. Ligaya Amilbangsa took him in, taught him everything she knew, shared with him all her documents and papers, treated him as a colleague, a son, and a beloved student. In fact, Dr. Santamaria was one of the founding members of the AlunAlun Dance Circle in 1999, inspired by the gentle waves (alunalun) that is so like the pangalay dance style that the group vows to preserve.
The easy accessibility of students to their teacher’s artistic and scholastic works creates a problem when former students use these without proper citation. While Philippine law safeguards intellectual property starting at the moment of creation, the protection of creators generally depends on the publication of their works. Much of Ms. Amilbangsa’s precious insights are still unpublished, but are open to us–her students, during our dance classes and discussions.
Ms. Amilbangsa taught us for free, which was a lot of kindness from a great teacher like her. In the unwritten ethics of social exchange, there must be some form of payment that students give to their teacher–in the form of recognition and respect. That we should treat her with respect, even reverence, by acknowledging and complementing her great contribution in preserving pangalay is an unspoken code of conduct.
The ambiguous “it”
What irks me is how Dr. Santamaria shrewdly used the pioneering formulations of Ms. Amilbangsa, found in her numerous monographs and unprecedented book, Pangalay: Traditional Dances and Related Folk Artistic Expressions (1983).
Dr. Santamaria in the paper entitled “Igal: Dance of Southern Seas” stated: “…First, dance scholars, notably Amilbangsa (1983), consider it to have the richest movement vocabulary among the dance traditions in the Philippines.”
Through the use of the pronoun “it,” Dr. Santamaria misrepresents Ms. Amilbangsa by making it appear that she spoke of igal as that which has “the richest movement vocabulary among the dance traditions in the Philippines;” when in fact, Ms. Amilbangsa used the description for pangalay. Ms. Amilbangsa has repeatedly written about the richness of pangalay, notably in “The Pangalay Dance Style of the Philippines: An Intangible Cultural Heritage,” a paper presented to the ONCC-UNESCO Experts Meeting on Intangible Cultural Heritage in Bangkok in 2005, where she wrote: “Among Philippine indigenous dances, the pangalay dance style has the richest movement vocabulary.”
Dr. Santamaria proceeds to describe igal: “This vocabulary is characterized by postures (set poses) and gestures (transitional movements from one pose to another) that give emphasis on flexion of the fingers, wrists and arms.
These ideas, stolen from Ms. Amilbangsa, were what drove me to unmask the work of Dr. Santamaria. The “vocabulary” that Dr. Santamaria describes as “igal” is actually the lifework of Ms. Amilbangsa, which, Dr. Santamaria now conveniently copies, uses, and paraphrases for his own ends.
Unmasking a copycat
Upon examination of the text, there are some evidences to prove my case. For starters, if we juxtapose the basic ideas of Dr. Santamaria’s description of igal with the formulations of Ms Amilbangsa, we will see the similarity in concepts and the derivation of ideas based on Ms. Amilbangsa’s. Much of Dr. Santamaria’s ‘igal’ is derived from the Pangalay (1983), and in the monographs of Ms. Ligaya Amilbangsa, which Dr. Santamaria have copies of.
At this point, let me stress that Ligaya Amilbangsa created her trailblazing works on the pangalay and on the other dance styles of the Sulu Archipelago without the support of government or any funding institution. She immersed herself in the Sulu Archipelago, where she lived for over two decades starting in 1969. Her writings and choreography were borne out of decades of research, participant observation, immersion, intuitive insight, and theorizing. Thanks to her painstaking deconstruction of the dances, she was able to define the art of the pangalay dance style (along with langka martial art traditions and lunsay), to give us what is now called the dance vocabulary of the pangalay composed of postures and gestures. She alone invented this method through careful analysis of the dance and through intuition. For example, the idea of “transitional movements from one pose to another” is Ms. Amilbangsa’s concept based on her own deconstruction of the dance. Even the way knees are bent or flexed, the outward-inward or inward-inward movements of the hands, the figure 8 movement that is likened to the gentle waves of the sea, the breathing that goes with the rhythm of the body movement—were intuited by her based on meticulous observation and research for over two decades.
However, the pangalay movement vocabulary as defined by Ligaya Amilbangsa is not rigid, as she is aware of the dynamic interplay of many factors with tradition: “Owing to the limitless possibilities of dance improvisation, depending upon the performer’s skill, it would be a mistake to regard a single version of the pangalay as the correct form or style.” (Amilbangsa, 1983, p 14)
Perhaps it is this absence of rigidity in pangalay dance style that led Dr. Santamaria to use and circumvent the basic ideas of Ligaya Amilbangsa to create his description of igal.
For example, Dr. Santamaria wrote in 2010: “ … the dance tradition is considered to constitute the Philippines’ living link to other major performance traditions in Southeast Asia. This is most evident in the uncanny similarity of igal dance postures to that of Classical Cambodian, Thai and Balinese postures.”
These ideas obviously come from Ms. Amilbangsa, who wrote:
“Pangalay is a living link to the traditional dance cultures of Asia with closest affinity to the Indian, Javanese, Thai, Burmese and Cambodian styles of classical dancing .”(Amilbangsa, 2005)
“Pangalay literally is a gift or offering. Generally it connotes dance which is synonymous to ‘igal’. ..It bears closest affinity to the classical dance traditions in the Asian region: the Pakarena (Sulawesi), Legong and Bedoyo (court dance) of Indonesia, the Khmer Court Dance of Cambodia, the Ramwong and Lakhon (dance drama) of Thailand, the Bharata Natyam and Manipuri of India, the Buyo and Noh of Japan, the Geong Jae and Salpuri of Korea.” (Amilbangsa, 2001)
As early as 1983, Ligaya Amilbangsa has defined pangalay in its many layers of meaning, and has clearly pointed out the relation of the pangalay style with the term ‘igal’:
“Mangalay or mag-igal means to dance (v.) or to move in rhythmic steps and glides and with rhythmic gestures.
Pangalay or igal generally connotes dance (n.) or a piece of dancing regardless of the function or the form.
Pangalay, in a restricted sense, connotes a traditional dance form or style which, altogether with the langka or martial dance style, bears closest affinity to the Thai (Siamese) and Balinese modes of dancing.” (Amilbangsa 1983, p.13 )
Ligaya Amilbangsa recorded the variances of pangalay during her time, and the names of some dances naturally had the term ‘igal’ (dance) in them, for example: courtship dance like Igal Ha Agung, game-song dance like Igal Ha Panyu, mimetic dance like Igal-Kussah, occupational dance like Igal Buwani, and so on. (Amilbangsa 1983, p. 17)
I don’t know why Dr. Santamaria has appropriated the generic term ‘igal’ to make a niche for himself. His reasons are not the subject of this paper. My concern is about the process and the product of his work: he did not labor as Ligaya Amilbangsa did, nor did he stumble into anything original and different from what Ligaya Amilbangsa has observed, researched, and formulated. To rationalize his use of the term ‘ igal,’ he conveniently assigned pangalay as a Tausug tradition, and igal as a Sama Dilaut tradition, which subverts the integrity of Ligaya Amilbangsa’s thesis, that pangalay is a dance tradition of the “Tausug, Samal, Badjao and Jama Mapun”—the peoples of the Sulu Archipelago. In her various lectures, Ms. Amilbangsa also noted that pangalay is related to the paunjalay/ pangunjalay of the Yakan in Basilan, which is also part of the Sulu Archipelago.
The ‘suchness’ of igal and pangalay
The ‘igal’ that Dr. Santamaria is talking about is none other than the pangalay style systematized by Ligaya Amilbangsa. Dr. Santamaria tries to make a different thing out of igal by saying that this is the dance of the Sama Dilaut in Sitangkai, Tawitawi province and in Semporna, Sabah, Malaysia. But if we pursue Ligaya Amilbangsa’s socio-historical contextualization, it follows that since pangalay is also the dance style of the Bajau or the Sama Dilaut—known to be the most widely dispersed maritime people of the Sulu-Sulawesi territory, it is a natural course of time and process that pangalay (also called igal by the people), through the Bajau diaspora, will develop its own variances in the places that they inhabit—including Metro Manila and other parts of Luzon.
Ms. Amilbangsa also made it clear that the geographic location of the Sulu Archipelago that “links Zamboanga to the northeastern extremity of Borneo, and separates the Sulu Sea and the Celebes Sea,” allowed fluid contact of its peoples with the rest of Southeast Asia. Thus, pangalay as the dominant dance style of the Sulu Archipelago would, in all probability, also be known in contiguous areas. The Sulu Sultanate, with the Sulu Archipelago as seat of its empire during the peak of its reign in the 18th and 19th centuries, wielded political, economic, and cultural power and influence over what is now known as parts of Malaysia and other parts of Southeast Asia, as well as China.
But to keep things simple, I will just repeat what sages have known since time immemorial: The ‘suchness’ of a thing does not change, even if given many other names, just as a rose is such, even by any other name.
The evidence of the same ‘suchness’ of pangalay and igal can be found in the program of Pesta Igal itself, which included dances that belonged to the repertoire of the AlunAlun Dance Circle:
The long program of the gala evening performance…includes contemporary works using igal movement vocabulary…The added features for the evening’s repertoire are …”Igal Kabkab”, a fan dance incorporating some movement techniques from Japanese and Okinawan dance techniques,…and “Jesu” a liturgical dance set to Johann Sebastian Bach “Jesus, Joy of Man’s Desiring” as arranged by jazz guitarist Windham Hill. (“Pesta Igal: From the Water Villages to the Stage”, Teatro Filipino Integrated, Inc. 2010)
Igal Kabkab, literally “fan dance,” has been researched and notated by Ligaya Amilbangsa in the 1970s. I saw her sketches using stick figures of the postures and gestures of Igal Kabkab, which she taught us earnestly, so our muscle memory may be the keeper of this beautiful pangalay fan dance. Matthew Santamaria learned Igal Kabkab from Ms Amilbangsa. It is now an important part of the pangalay movement vocabulary. The programs of the performances of the AlunAlun Dance Circle from 1999 to the present show that Igal Kabkab is part of the pangalay repertoire. Now, Dr. Santamaria recklessly categorizes this pangalay fan dance under ‘igal,’ as if he were the one who discovered and recorded it. To mask his deed, he tries to create his own brand of Igal Kabkab by incorporating Japanese and Okinawan fan dance techniques into it—which also raises a question whether it is wise to fuse the indigenous Igal Kabkab, rich and beautiful on its own, with fan dance styles that are not intrinsic to it.
Next case in point is “Jesu.” As artistic director of the AlunAlun Dance Circle, Ms. Amilbangsa has encouraged us to use the pangalay movement vocabulary with any kind of music. “Jesu” was part of such an experiment, largely choreographed by Dr. Santamaria, with my help, and with the guidance of our teacher. I was even the one who suggested to Dr Santamaria that we should use Windham Hill’s rendition instead of the heavy orchestra music that he worked with. “Jesu” is recorded in the published program of the show entitled, “Pangalay ng Bayan: Choreographic Explorations,” at the CCP Little Theatre on 12 January 2002. Now, as part of Pesta Igal, Dr. Santamaria conveniently categorizes “Jesu” under igal choreography. Isn’t this a proof that igal and pangalay are the same?
The testimony of the people
Finally, the strongest evidence for the same suchness of igal and pangalay can be found among the Sama Dilaut themselves. Through the research and shoot of several documentaries that I made, notably Memories of the Sea (2006) and Sayaw sa Alon (2008), I have met and made friends with the Bajau or Sama Dilaut. Whether they are the Bajau in Sitangkai or Sangasanga (Tawitawi), in Taluksangay (Zamboanga), in Roxas Boulevard and Paranaque (Metro Manila), even in Batangas and Laguna– they do not separate igal and pangalay.
The separation of igal and pangalay is a result of scholastic pursuits gone awry. The design of Dr. Santamaria to create division where there should be none runs against the very principle of Asian dance, which is about wholeness and harmony even among opposing forces (yin and yang, stillness in motion, motion in stillness). Meanwhile, the simple answer to the question, whether igal and pangalay are different, lies in the heart of the people: to them, igal and pangalay are the same, the dance which evokes the spirit of natural elements, the dance that gives them identity, that expresses their soul, and connects them with their true nature as a people.
Therefore, the thesis of Dr. Santamaria, that “igal is considered a tradition all its own,” is a lie. That is the simple truth.
References:
Pangalay: Traditional Dances and Related Folk Artistic Expressions, Ligaya Fernando-Amilbangsa, Filipinas Foundation, 1983.
“The Aesthetics of the Pangalay Dance style of the Sulu Archipelago,” Ligaya Fernando-Amilbangsa, paper presented during the Malay World Arts Festival Conference, 4-8 October 2001, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
“The Pangalay Dance Style of the Philippines: An Intangible Cultural Heritage,” Ligaya Amilbangsa, a paper presented to the Sub-Regional Experts Meeting in Asia on Intangible Cultural Heritage: Safeguarding and Inventory-making, Office of the National Culture Commission (ONCC) in cooperation with UNESCO, 13-16 December 2005, Bangkok, Thailand.
“Pesta Igal: From the Water Villages to the Stage,” paper circulated by Teatro Filipino Integrated, Inc. for the promotion of Pesta Igal: Traditional Music and Dance of the Southern Seas, July 14-15, 2010, University of the Philippines Asian Center Auditorium.
“Igal: Dance
Add comment July 16th, 2010
