Our love affair with fairs
July 26, 2003 | 12:00am
Everyone loves a fair. Today’s middle-class kids, and even their parents, find enchantment in vomit-producing rides, dizzying roller coasters and empty-calorie snacks. All of these can be enjoyed in copious amounts, in artificial suburban kingdoms of fun, for a few hundred pesos. Time was when fairs were more serious events held in the center of the city in exchange for a few coins, although restraint was never a concern.
Our love affair with fairs in the city has a long history that started with the Manila Carnival. This annual event was held at the Luneta (actually in the area known as Wallace Field — today’s Agrifina Circle). It was staged regularly in the pre-war years (WWII, not the Iraq one) to showcase the progress of a colony, its agricultural and manufactured goods, and growing educational and government institutions. It was also a general excuse to make merry.
The reputation of the Manila Carnival spread internationally. We also participated in international expositions, mostly in the United States, from the turn of the century. First, we were but objects of curiosity (like the dog-eaters at the St. Louis Fair of 1905) but later, the Philippine pavilions in these world fairs showed a more politically-correct and progressive image of our archipelago.
By the late 1930s, we felt that we could host one of these large international expositions. Our economy was one of the fastest-growing in the Far East. President Manuel L. Quezon believed that with impending independence, we needed the boost of a world-class event to mark our entry into the world of modern nations. So he had an International Exposition planned for 1941. War intervened.
It took over a decade for the idea to be resurrected. Post-war Manila took over five years to rebuild enough of its infrastructure and economy to start back where it left off before the war. The Manila Carnival had also not been staged since liberation in 1945. Civic leaders and businessmen believed it was time to put the Filipino nation on the world stage. A title and date were chosen for the staging of the first world exposition to be held in Asia — the 1953 Philippines International Fair.
The organizing committee, put together by Secretary of Commerce and Industry Cornelio Balmaceda, stated three main objectives of the fair: 1) to show what the Philippines has achieved in the last five centuries in the cultural, social, economic and political fields, 2) to present the nation’s unlimited national resources for industrial development, and its commercial and (tourism) possibilities, and finally, 3) to establish closer relationships in commerce and trade between the Philippines and other nations.
Secretary Balmaceda announced, "The three-month fair will indeed bring to the notice of the world the growth and development of the Philippines in the last four centuries. It will be a significant event that will be a fitting prelude to a new era of commercial and industrial expansion in this country."
Balmaceda noted that trade could be boosted significantly with fairs such as this. He reported that Philippine products were just starting to get noticed because of the country’s participation in European fairs in Milan and Barcelona after WWII.
There was great interest in participation in the fair both locally and internationally. By the fair’s opening in February 1953, 10 foreign nations had built pavilions – the United States, Spain, China, Indonesia, Italy, Sweden, Thailand, Cambodia, Belgium and Vietnam. The Philippines was represented by 27 provinces and 16 chartered cities. There were also pavilions for the main departments of the new Philippine Republic as well as commercial pavilions of major Philippine enterprises, like the Elizalde Company and Philippine Airlines.
Architect Otilio Arellano, nephew of Juan Arellano, was put in charge of laying out the fair on the site of the original Manila Carnival. By the 1950s, Wallace Field was an overgrown talahib patch between the Agrifina buildings and the Rizal Monument. Few gave him or the fair’s organizers much chance of getting the fair built and opened on time. Those detractors were proven wrong.
The theme of the 1953 Philippine International Fair was "500 Years of Philippine Progress." This theme mirrored several expositions in the United States, most recent of which was the 1933 Chicago "Century of Progress" fair. Arellano laid out the Philippine fair at a similar scale but used a symmetrical pattern that was more reminiscent of an older fair — the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago, designed by Daniel Burnham. (Burnham had intended to make the Luneta the National Mall of the colonial capital. He probably never figured that the site would be used for another function.)
The pavilions were distributed among the international and local sections on either side of a long central reflecting pool. The pool and the fair’s entrance were built behind the Rizal Monument. The main axis was formed by this pool connecting the monument with a landmark tower — Arellano’s "Gateway to the East." This distinctive arch was an art deco-esque structure topped by an abstracted salakot. Behind this "gateway" was a large circular plot that housed the Catholic pavilion designed by architects Arturo Mañalac and Evelio N. Valdes. The prominence given this pavilion reflected the sensibilities of the era and the influence of a Catholic Church that survived American secularization and two wars. (It was ironic that many of the motifs used in the fair’s architecture were from Mindanao, or what was referred to as the Mohammedan south.)
The international pavilions were all distinctive. The Spanish pavilion, designed by Filipino architect Carlos E. Da Silva, was a low arcaded podium with a tall modernist tower. The United States pavilion was shaped like the Liberty Bell and was understandably one of the most popular in the fair. The Asian pavilions were also a must-see as Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand and China cut exotic silhouettes in the Luneta sky.
The Indonesian pavilion, however, was of architectural note as it showed an international-modernist translation of their local vernacular style. The Philippine pavilions provided local architects with the opportunity to experiment in the more contemporary styles that the west was adopting. The classical revivalist style was nowhere to be found. Boxy forms prevailed and the use of brise soleil or sunshades was in vogue. These modernist forms were to be seen years after the fair in new government buildings and commercial structures, a testimony to the fair’s great influence on Philippine architecture (much like the way the Columbian exposition in Chicago affected American architecture then).
The fair was also embellished generously with paintings and allegorical sculpture. Beside the "Gateway to the East" were the statues of the "Four Freedoms." Behind these and much of the sculptural work at the fair was Francesco Monti, a 25-year-old Italian expatriate, who also taught at the University of Santo Tomas. The entrance pavilion was made more colorful by a massive mural of Philippine history by Botong Francisco.
Opened by President Elpidio Quirino on Feb. 1, 1953, the event was supposed to last for three months till April. The fair was a huge success. People came in droves. It drew over two million visitors in its three-month run, prompting an extension of another month. It finally closed on the 31st of May of that year.
The fair was managed by the Philippines International Fair, Inc., a private corporation sponsored by the government. Arsenio N. Luz was appointed director general of the fair. The PIFI was intended to be a permanent body tasked with organizing, operating and managing this and succeeding fairs to be held locally, as well as Philippine participation in foreign fairs and expositions.
The fair was planned to be a yearly event, with the succeeding one in 1954 transferred to a permanent site in Quezon City. The site chosen was, in fact, one already designated as such in the 1941 masterplan for Quezon City prepared by American planner Harry Frost. Frost was commissioned to do a scheme for this international fair, which he did right before returning to the United States a few months before the outbreak of the war. (The site is today SM North, a permanent exposition of consumer goods that brings in the same number of visitors, as that of the 1953 fair, to that mall every week.)
So, what happened after the fair? The optimism of a country looking forward to full industrialization and economic growth was dashed by the realities of insurgency, politics, graft and corruption, and pressure from developed countries (and global corporations) to keep us dependent and forever agricultural. We opened trade links, but our products were doomed never to rise beyond cottage-industry levels. We generated some interest for tourism, but much of our heritage was destroyed during the war and transport infrastructure defaulted to makeshift systems like our jeepneys (an inefficient and pollution-enhancing legacy we are still stuck with).
Forty-five years later, in 1998, the Philippines found itself at the crest of an economic wave we all thought would never come down. A grand, over-priced, ill-located "international" expo was planned and built. The agenda of this expo was the same economic and cultural boosterism that produced the 1953 one.
There was not much good that either seemed to produce save for fleeting entertainment. The Clark Expo was almost completely designed by foreigners. At least, the 1953 fair gave prominence to local architects. It gave them the confidence to experiment and showed their technical and creative competence to an appreciative public.
One saving grace was that the Philippine International Fair seemed to revive the memory of a grand scheme to provide the city with a center. This memory served to spawn a revival of interest in resurrecting heritage sites and sprucing up the Luneta. A decade after the 1953 fair, Rizal Park started in its decade-long trek to become the country’s premier open space.
Fairs are fine. International expositions generate true interest in countries, their cultures and produce. National expositions were held after the 1953 fair to generate activity in inter-provincial trade and local tourism. Such fairs are now staged in mega-venues like SM and other malls.
An international exposition in Manila is still a dream. But it would be a great dream come true – even without the benefit of an international fair – to have the knowledge that we have progressed these last 500 years. That we have been able to rise above the backwardness of our un-nationalist economics, the oppression of national self-doubt, and our own collective stupidity in prioritizing politics over true progress.
It would be a great thing, indeed, if we gave ourselves a fair chance.
Feedback is welcome. Please e-mail the writer at citysensephilstar@hotmail.com. I will be giving scheduled guided tours of the Burnham Plan Exhibit (and the site of the 1953 exposition above) at the Metropolitan Museum in the next few weeks. For more information, call the Metropolitan Museum at 523-0613.
Our love affair with fairs in the city has a long history that started with the Manila Carnival. This annual event was held at the Luneta (actually in the area known as Wallace Field — today’s Agrifina Circle). It was staged regularly in the pre-war years (WWII, not the Iraq one) to showcase the progress of a colony, its agricultural and manufactured goods, and growing educational and government institutions. It was also a general excuse to make merry.
The reputation of the Manila Carnival spread internationally. We also participated in international expositions, mostly in the United States, from the turn of the century. First, we were but objects of curiosity (like the dog-eaters at the St. Louis Fair of 1905) but later, the Philippine pavilions in these world fairs showed a more politically-correct and progressive image of our archipelago.
It took over a decade for the idea to be resurrected. Post-war Manila took over five years to rebuild enough of its infrastructure and economy to start back where it left off before the war. The Manila Carnival had also not been staged since liberation in 1945. Civic leaders and businessmen believed it was time to put the Filipino nation on the world stage. A title and date were chosen for the staging of the first world exposition to be held in Asia — the 1953 Philippines International Fair.
The organizing committee, put together by Secretary of Commerce and Industry Cornelio Balmaceda, stated three main objectives of the fair: 1) to show what the Philippines has achieved in the last five centuries in the cultural, social, economic and political fields, 2) to present the nation’s unlimited national resources for industrial development, and its commercial and (tourism) possibilities, and finally, 3) to establish closer relationships in commerce and trade between the Philippines and other nations.
Secretary Balmaceda announced, "The three-month fair will indeed bring to the notice of the world the growth and development of the Philippines in the last four centuries. It will be a significant event that will be a fitting prelude to a new era of commercial and industrial expansion in this country."
Balmaceda noted that trade could be boosted significantly with fairs such as this. He reported that Philippine products were just starting to get noticed because of the country’s participation in European fairs in Milan and Barcelona after WWII.
There was great interest in participation in the fair both locally and internationally. By the fair’s opening in February 1953, 10 foreign nations had built pavilions – the United States, Spain, China, Indonesia, Italy, Sweden, Thailand, Cambodia, Belgium and Vietnam. The Philippines was represented by 27 provinces and 16 chartered cities. There were also pavilions for the main departments of the new Philippine Republic as well as commercial pavilions of major Philippine enterprises, like the Elizalde Company and Philippine Airlines.
The theme of the 1953 Philippine International Fair was "500 Years of Philippine Progress." This theme mirrored several expositions in the United States, most recent of which was the 1933 Chicago "Century of Progress" fair. Arellano laid out the Philippine fair at a similar scale but used a symmetrical pattern that was more reminiscent of an older fair — the 1893 Columbian Exposition in Chicago, designed by Daniel Burnham. (Burnham had intended to make the Luneta the National Mall of the colonial capital. He probably never figured that the site would be used for another function.)
The pavilions were distributed among the international and local sections on either side of a long central reflecting pool. The pool and the fair’s entrance were built behind the Rizal Monument. The main axis was formed by this pool connecting the monument with a landmark tower — Arellano’s "Gateway to the East." This distinctive arch was an art deco-esque structure topped by an abstracted salakot. Behind this "gateway" was a large circular plot that housed the Catholic pavilion designed by architects Arturo Mañalac and Evelio N. Valdes. The prominence given this pavilion reflected the sensibilities of the era and the influence of a Catholic Church that survived American secularization and two wars. (It was ironic that many of the motifs used in the fair’s architecture were from Mindanao, or what was referred to as the Mohammedan south.)
The international pavilions were all distinctive. The Spanish pavilion, designed by Filipino architect Carlos E. Da Silva, was a low arcaded podium with a tall modernist tower. The United States pavilion was shaped like the Liberty Bell and was understandably one of the most popular in the fair. The Asian pavilions were also a must-see as Cambodia, Vietnam, Thailand and China cut exotic silhouettes in the Luneta sky.
The Indonesian pavilion, however, was of architectural note as it showed an international-modernist translation of their local vernacular style. The Philippine pavilions provided local architects with the opportunity to experiment in the more contemporary styles that the west was adopting. The classical revivalist style was nowhere to be found. Boxy forms prevailed and the use of brise soleil or sunshades was in vogue. These modernist forms were to be seen years after the fair in new government buildings and commercial structures, a testimony to the fair’s great influence on Philippine architecture (much like the way the Columbian exposition in Chicago affected American architecture then).
The fair was also embellished generously with paintings and allegorical sculpture. Beside the "Gateway to the East" were the statues of the "Four Freedoms." Behind these and much of the sculptural work at the fair was Francesco Monti, a 25-year-old Italian expatriate, who also taught at the University of Santo Tomas. The entrance pavilion was made more colorful by a massive mural of Philippine history by Botong Francisco.
The fair was managed by the Philippines International Fair, Inc., a private corporation sponsored by the government. Arsenio N. Luz was appointed director general of the fair. The PIFI was intended to be a permanent body tasked with organizing, operating and managing this and succeeding fairs to be held locally, as well as Philippine participation in foreign fairs and expositions.
The fair was planned to be a yearly event, with the succeeding one in 1954 transferred to a permanent site in Quezon City. The site chosen was, in fact, one already designated as such in the 1941 masterplan for Quezon City prepared by American planner Harry Frost. Frost was commissioned to do a scheme for this international fair, which he did right before returning to the United States a few months before the outbreak of the war. (The site is today SM North, a permanent exposition of consumer goods that brings in the same number of visitors, as that of the 1953 fair, to that mall every week.)
Forty-five years later, in 1998, the Philippines found itself at the crest of an economic wave we all thought would never come down. A grand, over-priced, ill-located "international" expo was planned and built. The agenda of this expo was the same economic and cultural boosterism that produced the 1953 one.
There was not much good that either seemed to produce save for fleeting entertainment. The Clark Expo was almost completely designed by foreigners. At least, the 1953 fair gave prominence to local architects. It gave them the confidence to experiment and showed their technical and creative competence to an appreciative public.
One saving grace was that the Philippine International Fair seemed to revive the memory of a grand scheme to provide the city with a center. This memory served to spawn a revival of interest in resurrecting heritage sites and sprucing up the Luneta. A decade after the 1953 fair, Rizal Park started in its decade-long trek to become the country’s premier open space.
Fairs are fine. International expositions generate true interest in countries, their cultures and produce. National expositions were held after the 1953 fair to generate activity in inter-provincial trade and local tourism. Such fairs are now staged in mega-venues like SM and other malls.
An international exposition in Manila is still a dream. But it would be a great dream come true – even without the benefit of an international fair – to have the knowledge that we have progressed these last 500 years. That we have been able to rise above the backwardness of our un-nationalist economics, the oppression of national self-doubt, and our own collective stupidity in prioritizing politics over true progress.
It would be a great thing, indeed, if we gave ourselves a fair chance.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
