51 pages • 1 hour read
José RizalEl Filibusterismo
Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 1891A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Symbols & Motifs
Filibusterismo
According to Father Sibyla, “The word filibustero […] means a dangerous patriot who will soon be on the gallows, or else a conceited fellow” (15). The actual etymology of the word dates it to the 16th century, and it most likely derives from the Dutch vrijbueter (freebooter) and the French flibustier. Hispanicized, the word became filibustero. Regardless of its origin, each word once described a person engaging in unauthorized warfare against a foreign country. This meaning has become dated in both Dutch and French; the English filibuster also has a different meaning (using prolonged speech to obstruct progress within a legislative assembly). Nevertheless, Father Sibyla’s definition and other definitions describe the motives of many of the novel’s characters.
Simoun/Ibarra mostly connotes the original meaning of filibustero: He wants to wage war against the clergy and Spanish government who abused him and his loved ones (his father and María Clara), but also the Filipino populace. He and Cabesang Tales are filibusteros in their acts of vengeance. Basilio, Isagani, and other students are filibusteros as per Father Sibyla’s definition. The clergy and government view them as such because they seek social reform through education; the students want to upset the status quo that the clergy wishes to maintain. The clergy and the government itself are filibusteros as per the modern English definition because they do everything they can to obstruct legislative reform in the Philippines.
Simoun’s Jewels
The Reign of Greed is one of the English translations of El Filibusterismo in conjunction with Charles Derbyshire’s translation. Its significance is made clear when Father Florentino throws Simoun’s jewels into the sea: “And meanwhile, where you are now you will do no harm, you won’t twist what is right, nor be the cause of any avarice!” (319). Simoun’s jewels are his means of obtaining power and enacting revenge, and come to symbolize the destruction of the Philippine islands by Spanish greed.
Spanish conquest and colonization were driven by a desire for riches. As colonization of the Philippines progressed, the actual governing of the Philippines became of less interest. Many Captain-Generals simply sought to acquire as much wealth as possible during their tenure, in order to return to Spain in affluence. The clergy had a similar idea, though they rarely returned to the mainland. Eventually, this self-serving mindset became a part of colonial culture, something José Rizal highlights in the novel. Characters like Sister Penchang, Doña Victorina, and Señor Pasta among others represent Filipino figures who adapted to a corrupt system, becoming affluent while leaving their poorer compatriots at the mercy of the Spanish government and clergy.
The End Justifies the Means
The phrase “the end justifies the means” is an argument used to justify extreme measures, mostly in business and politics. In El Filibusterismo, this argument is used by Simoun and his bandit allies and their enemies, the Spanish government and clergy. The novel uses its characters to illustrate the dangers of prioritizing the suffering of a single individual over those wronged.
After the broadsides are released and the students rounded up in Chapter 28, the phrase “the end justifies the means” (247) is used to argue draconian measures in dealing with the students—including executing some as a lesson to others who might rebel. In Chapter 31, the Captain-General says as much to his primary political advisor, arguing that such steps are requisite for maintaining peace and stability. Even Simoun uses a derivative of the phrase to justify the deaths of innocents to his lamp-bomb: “The world will applaud, like it always does, saying that the strongest, and the most violent, are in the right” (280). Citing historical precedence to justify violence is an argument Simoun used to justify the labor of enslaved people on behalf of those he loathes (the Spanish government, clergy, and complicit Filipino citizens) in Chapter 1, when he mentions the Egyptian pyramids. Overall, the novel does its best to illustrate the destruction and hypocrisy of such thinking, rather than framing resistance itself (especially against corruption) as unwarranted or wrong.
