Note: this series is based on the findings of a study made possible by a grant from the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) conducted by Dr. Ramon Felipe A. Sarmiento (this writer) and Dr. Jose Z. Tria, both professors at the Catanduanes State University.
In the first part, we started with the observation that the traditional practice of kagharong lends particular flavour that makes Christmas in Catanduanes one-of-a-kind. We demonstrated that it is a success story of an old tradition that, instead of fading away into obsolescence, had become even more dynamic and alive; a living heritage. We have, too, explained how two types of observance evolved through time, a “special” kagharong and an “ordinary” one, the latter type being called “baray-baray.” It is this type that brought the kagharong to the great majority of people particularly those in the remote areas. In this second part we discuss the two main aspects as theatrical performance, namely the script (or text) and the music.
The kagharong script
In Part 1, we said that kagharong in Catanduanes is of several versions with each version having its own variants. But what unifies them is that they all use practically the same text, or the words that the actors deliver in the performance, or the script. We don’t know at this point the author of the text but most certainly it originated from Bikol mainland. It is rendered in Naga Bikol, the religious lingua franca of the region. It is written in verse, consisting of quatrains (four-line stanzas), each line consisting of eight syllables. There is also a rhyming scheme where the last sound of the lines are the same, although this is not maintained in all places. For example, the most familiar stanza goes
Sisay camong yaon dian
Na nagaapod sa dalan
Caning banguing alang- alang
Ano bagang catuyohan?
This kind of format is observed for 1) the poetic effect and 2) easy rendering into music. In any case, the actors’ dialogues are not realistic or conversational; you do not hear people talk in verse in ordinary situations. Like most other traditional dramatic forms, the kagharong is stylized for more aesthetic appeal.
The narrative. The kagharong story is composed of three main parts. The first is set in Joseph and Mary’s residence in Nazareth and the next two take place in Bethlehem. In part 1, we see the couple going into preparations for their trip to Bethlehem in order to fulfil an official mandate from the authorities to submit to a census and pay taxes. They have a problem because Mary is heavy with a child and is about to deliver the baby. They decide to go together; Joseph cannot leave Mary behind in her condition. As preparation, Mary puts together the provisions needed, food and swaddling items for the new-born baby. Joseph for his part secures a donkey to convey Mary and their provisions. This part ends where the couple blesses each other and launches into the ordeal of their journey which should cover some 120 leagues that takes five days of travel on foot.
The story is told in the point of view of Mary and Joseph. It is their story. The kagharong is a journey drama, telling of the difficult ordeal of the couple along the streets from Nazareth but mostly in Bethlehem. They are the mainstay characters from beginning to end. As such, their thoughts, revealed in dialogues and monologues, weave the narrative together and make sense of the turn of events and actions.
For the first part, additions are made by certain stagings. In Buyo, Virac they have an opening prayer. In Oguis, Bato, they add an entire section depicting the Annunciation (the Angel Gabriel announcing to Mary about God’s plan of she becoming the mother of Jesus). In other places, they start with a prelude with a herald (bayabay) reading the decree by Roman authorities regarding the census and paying of taxes. These apparently are revisions made to the original script.
The second part is the main course, so to speak. It is what the kagharong is all about. It is what people remember, the most awaited part where the real action takes place. It depicts the actual search by the couple for a place to stay, rest and have Mary deliver unto this world the Saviour of the world. The problem is that house owners and innkeepers were consistent in their disregard of the couple’s pleas for hospitality; they routinely rejected them in nasty, overbearing (mataray) manners.
It is a long middle part that takes about 80% of the entire running time of the drama. It consists of a series of episodes of Mary and Joseph arriving at the door of a house (casa) make their plea and routinely sent away. In all, there are six such casas divided into two kinds. The first is that of the padron (the census taker) who takes the census and accepts the tax payment. The next five are house-owners or innkeepers. In four case-studies done (Virac centro; Buyo, Virac; Progreso, San Miguel; Oguis, Bato), it turned out that there are variations in the sequencing of the casas. In both Buyo and Virac poblacion, the padron is the first and the five others follow. In Oguis, Bato and Progreso, San Miguel, the padron comes second to the last. Before the end of this middle part, the couple is told of a cave (cueva or corocobacho) in the outskirts of town which is used by shepherds as refuge shed for animals; they can try it there.
In the third and last part, Mary and Joseph decides to take shelter in the animal shed where Jesus would eventually be born. The play ends with the couple reflecting on their sad plight, but gaining the insight that it is all to fulfil God’s plan that the Messiah should be born in most humble circumstances.
Characterization. By the text of the verbal exchanges, we get a hold of the character types of the personalities in the drama. In this regard, there is clear separation of the protagonists, namely Mary and Joseph on the one hand, and the caseros as antagonists on the other hand. The characters are of the bida-kontrabida stereotypes that we see in a melodrama. Mary and Joseph as the protagonists are consistently kind-hearted, soft-spoken, thoughtful and pious. They are epitomes of goodness and godliness. However, there is a perceptible difference between the two. Joseph is the ever solicitous gentleman-husband of the partnership, anxious to see to Mary’s comfort and welfare. He constantly expresses anxiety about their difficulties. Mary on the other hand is the paragon of inner strength. She constantly reassures Joseph, wards off his anxiety and goes through the ordeal without complaint. She accepts their fate as God’s will, confident that thing will be alright.
The caseros for their part, taking the role of applying adversity on the bida, assume grossly negative traits. But there is variation in harshness across the six sets of casas. Each has a particular character and temperament unique from the others. But three types of characterization can be identified based on their relational attitude to the couple and the manner and degree of rejection they inflict. The first two are quite extreme in their malevolence while the third is lesser so:
- The rich and the mighty; extreme in their rejection – here the caseros flaunts their superior status (mayayaman, maginoo) over the poor and lowly couple, are sorely irritated of the disturbance of their peace, and harshly sends them away.
- The rich and mighty; particularly mocking in their rejection – basically the same with the first type, but with added nastiness by their mockery of the situation of Mary and Joseph.So they sing: Anong ugay anong bados/ Paghale na camo tolos/ Siisay saindong cagboot/ Na maglacao camong bados? Or they are oblivious of the darkness of the night or bad weather: Madiclomon o malipot man/ Anong labot mi caiyan/ Sala nindo ta naglacao/ Maghanap nin capagalan.
- The rich and mighty relatives; somehow apologetic in their rejection – they call Joseph and Mary as “pinsan” or “tugang” but refuses them hospitality variously saying that there is no more space available or that their parents, who are the ones decisive, are already asleep and cannot be disturbed.
Interpretive content. As already mentioned, the kagharong is told in the point of view of Mary and Joseph. As such, it is not merely about them going through the action of the story, but they also interpreted the goings-on and indeed made the final statement at the end. For this purpose, Mary and Joseph engaged in interpretive commentaries throughout: at the start, in between the casa episodes, and at the finale. Such reflections are made on two aspects. First is to make sense of the cruel treatment they got from the casers. For them, it was not simply an incidental but sustained bad luck they suffered in Bethlehem. The ruthlessness of the caseros was, for Mary and Joseph, representative of the basic wickedness of society as a whole. Particularly, the wickedness is manifested in the gross divide between the privileged and underprivileged in society: it is about the rich and the powerful inflicting themselves on the poor and powerless. This may be seen as a sociological statement of the kagharong drama. In Mary’s analysis she intoned:
An vanidad caining mundo
An nangyayari sa tauo
Yyo lamang estimado
An mayaman maguinoo.
But there is another overlay of interpretation, a theological one. The world, as experienced by Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem, is a fallen world. The very world that will benefit from the Messiah that Mary was about to deliver, was to reject him. It is the way God has willed, to which Mary and Joseph are most willing to accede to and be instrumental to its fulfilment.
We will never know what actually occurred in Mary and Joseph’s mind during that first Christmas Eve. But the writer/s of the kagharong narrative clearly had the goal of making the drama a platform to teach Catholic doctrine to the audience. So they made the couple verbalize doctrinal statements in their interpretive moments. For example, they referred to their yet unborn child as Divino Verbo, a theological concept that would only be in use several hundreds of years into the future, as if presaging the evangelist St. John. But between the two, it was Mary who mostly engaged in axiomatic reflection. Toward the finale, she neatly sums up what could be the entire message of the kagharong:
Sinda logod caheracan
Macamidbid nin mahusay
Ngani sindang maquinabang
Can pagtubos sa quinaban
The kagharong music
The music is what makes the kagharong what it is. It is a musical play where characters sing their parts which lends much of the emotional content of the narrative, more effectively conveying meanings than plain recitation of words. Being traditional, the music is most kindred to the Spanish zarzuela where the characters are heavily stereo-typed into the bida-kontrabida distinction.
To suit the stereo-typed characterization of Mary and Joseph, both are made to sing in plaintive melodies in slow beat. However, the melodies are not quite variable; they sing in limited number of melodic sets that are oft repeated such that they stick in the audience mind and become signature tunes. But Mary and Joseph are distinctively flavoured in their solo parts. In the Virac poblacion version for example, Mary is made to sing in major key which conveys a decisiveness and hope than Joseph’s mostly minor key that suits his anxiety.
In the other versions particularly those in the northern towns, it is observed that the arias of Mary and Joseph, aside from plaintive tone and slow beat, are rendered in over-stretched and tedious meandering manner. It seems akin to the chants of pre-colonial times, in what people describe as languyod singing. Does this mean that in representing Mary and Joseph, the kagharong draws inspiration from deep-seated pre-Christian folk sensibilities?
The singing of the caseros expectedly is diametrically different from Mary and Joseph. In direct contrast to the gentle manner of the protagonists, the casero parts are loud, frivolous and aggressive. They conjure tones of cruel mockery, sung fast and bouncy in either marching or balse (waltzing) rhythms. If Mary and Joseph’s music suggests affinities with indigenous origins, the casero part clearly carry strong Hispanic influence particularly from the zarzuela genre. Furthermore, the casa songs feature much more variety and dynamics. While the melodies for Mary and Joseph are repeated in cycles, the six casa sets are different from each other that project particular circumstances and attitudes. Within the same set too, there are shifts in tone and beat, making for highly textured flow. Suffice it to say that the audience derive so much delight in the casa episodes which balances and compliments their poignant rooting for Mary and Joseph.
Differentiation also happens in the musical accompaniment. Mary and Joseph’s singing is supplement by subtle instruments such as guitar, violin and soulful sax. The caseros are embellished by the blares of drums and brass. Employing of musicians however depends on the resources of the organizers. In the “special” kagharong staged by more economically capable pastoral units, a full selection of instrumentalists lends much grandeur, but the “baray-baray” staging in the boondocks make do with at most a pair of guitars.
While the players read from a written script for the words, the music is learned oido manner (by ear). With the exception of Virac poblacion, kagharong music has not been committed to written notation. As such, kagharong is largely an oral tradition so that it sustains alterations through time in the turn-over of generations of practitioners. But the lyrics are not exempt from changes. Copying and recopying of the text bring in omissions, additions and changes in spelling. In any case, all that indicate that the kagharong is a dynamic tradition that remains alive in the hands of the people who continue to draw meaning and relevance from it. But such dynamism is to be seen also in the other aspects in performing the kagharong such as the visuals, staging and acting conventions which will be tackled in the third part.