Weighing words

Recent developments, decidedly socio-political if imbued with cultural undertones, have presented curious opportunities to review our familiarity with the exercise of language. 

Of personal interest was a comment attributed to political pundit Roberto Tiglao, who cast doubts on the veracity of a handwritten journal that had made the Internet rounds.

“Flawless prose,” he remarked, suggesting that it was ghostwritten, the way the language seemingly belied the level of articulation in English that a former policeman and self-confessed hitman might be capable of. 

Other observers proposed that the writer be given a test, to verify if he could express himself in the same manner as he had in literally penning that journal. Since he was set to be grilled at a Senate hearing, I imagined offering my services as a writing workshop maven, one who should be able to render a verdict on consistency of literary style. Unfortunately, no one at that hearing brought up the matter.

But here’s a page of SPO3 Arturo Lascañas’ journal, which we can discuss here:

“Mayor RRD’s entry into the Presidential Derby 2016 could be the Divine Trap. It could lead him to his political Waterloo. Win or lose, sooner or later he would become the most hated political figure in Philippine History. Based on his Personality, Character and Temper. He is Physically, Mentally and Spiritually disturbed person. He is in for Flesh, Blood, and Power, no matter what. What he wants, he gets. What matter’s him most (sic) is his Personal and Political Security. If ever he will win the Presidency and apply into the whole country the Davao Formula of bloodletting on the premised of (sic) Peace and Order and illegal drugs, eventually he will lead this country into hell and deceptively perpetuate himself to Lifetime in Power. And the rest in lethal history. Evil Prevail. (sic) Only GOD has the sole dominion of human life. Nobody has the eternal right and authority to take it. For whatever reasons and purpose, but the Divine Creator, GOD. I faithfully believe that I am at peace with my Divine Creator if my conscience is clean and clear. My clean and clear conscience is My direct guide to make righteous decisions to repent of all my mortal sins that will lead me to submit to The Will of GOD. If to follow’s (sic) GOD’s Will, will lead me to Persecution, Incarceration, loss of human dignity, and painful death so be it. THY WILL BE DONE.”

Okay, never mind the irregular capitalization of the first letters of certain words. He might have read and been influenced by the poet Emily Dickinson, who endowed some words of her arbitrary choice with such typographical power. Of course this also ushered Mr. Lascañas into the privilege of rendering the generic name of his Divine Creator in all caps.

But I wouldn’t call his prose flawless. In fact, that single page merited at least four “sics” — sic standing for the Latin sic erat scriptum in full, meaning “thus was it written.” Per Wikipedia, sic is “inserted after a quoted word or passage (to indicate) that the quoted matter has been transcribed exactly as found in the source text, complete with any erroneous or archaic spelling, surprising assertion, faulty reasoning, or other matter that might otherwise be taken as an error of transcription.”

As you saw above, I couldn’t help but insert “(sic)” four times. “Sic may also be used derisively, to call attention to the original writer’s spelling mistakes or erroneous logic.” No intention here to deride Lascañas’ prose. It was more to highlght my own raised eyebrows over the contention that it was flawless.

At least a couple of prepositions went awry, and there appeared incomplete sentences, as well as a tendency to drop the article “a” where proper adjectival use deemed it necessary.

I understand the incredulity over his use of such a loaded term as “Divine Trap” as well as the allusion to a “political Waterloo.” Both suggest some level of reading experience involving religious terminology and world history. Yet I wouldn’t be eager to profile all cops as being entirely remote from literacy.

What was particularly intriguing was the use of the novel phrase “lethal history.” This seems original. Perhaps Lascañas had cleverly replaced “weapon” (as a professional hitman, he could distinguish and identify particular ones) with a word that subsumed a parade of killing instruments pertinent to his story. 

At the Senate hearing, often did he verbalize in a fashion that paralleled his language use in the purported journal. At some point, he mentioned how he was “following the righteous path of clearing my conscience…” He also uttered quite calmly: “I cannot take these evil deeds to my grave.”

As he spoke, the man struck me as all of a piece. I’m glad that the veteran journalist and editor Inday Espina Varona rendered a similar assessment in an FB post:

“My main takeaways are not on whether or not the claims are true, but these: 1) Those simple, clear declarative sentences. 2) The smooth, powerful flow of the mind, reflected in words. The sense of introspection, shown in narratives of the past and heightened by intimation of mortality. (That’s a monologue worthy of any play. In fact, listening, imagining the words scrolled on a page, I’d say, that is how you write, including the rhythm of the words said in that deep voice.) 3) The unflinching acceptance of responsibility and the willingness to pay the price for past deeds. No chance of privileges in return for this testimony. 4) Yes, the senators should push him hard. As hard as he flings the charges. That is how it should be. There should be no coddling of the witness (except to ensure his physical safety) as there should be no coddling of those in power.”

So was he also responsible for the procession of thoughts expressed in the journal, beyond mere penmanship? I would think so. There was certainly more gravitas than that displayed by Sen. Sotto when he tried to gain a brownie point on the use of different fonts and font sizes in the encoding of Lascañas’ affidavit. Why, even Sen. Pacquiao weighed in with more lethal power when he quoted the Holy Book: “By your words you will be acquitted; by your words you will be condemned.”

We didn’t know then that he’d follow up on the Sunday punches when he similarly applied closure to the confirmation hearing re DENR secretary-designate Gina Lopez. Quoting verses 7 to 9 of Deuteronomy Chapter 8, the eight-division champ stammered as he read from his mobile phone about God giving man a “good land” with rich streams, rivers and valleys, and “you can dig copper out of the hills.”

Pushing his ringcraft luck, he tried fancy paraphrasing footwork, unaware that he was stumbling all over the place: “There is even instructing, you can dig copper, but if you understand the first line, there’s responsible, meaning responsible mining,” No need for sics; we all heard him say that.

Poet, editor and bookmaker Donato Mejia Alvarez ought to have the last word on the matter: “It has been said often that God is the last refuge of the scoundrels. I must add that the words of God are the weapon of choice by some people worse than scoundrels in order to slay the truth.”