Discretion

In the final exam for my Shakespeare class at the University of the Philippines many, many, many years ago, the professor – one of those “terror” teachers that the Diliman campus was famous for but who certainly knew her Shakespeare – posed five questions, four of which were mandatory and the fifth optional. Not answering the fifth question – it was on the rarely studied “The Life and Death of King John” – would have no effect on our grade; answering it could mean extra points, but it could also mean a lower grade if you did poorly.

We hadn’t studied King John at any length or depth in class; the play – and the king – not being shining moments of Shakespeare or English history (although he was credited with signing, or was forced to sign, the Magna Carta, he lost most of England’s land in France, and you have to wonder why no other king since has chosen the name John). The exam question had no right or wrong answer; you just had to make a good argument. Apparently, not one who chose to answer the question gave a good enough argument. In handing back the blue books, the professor had only one admonition, also from Shakespeare (Henry IV, Part I), for the hopefully wiser students: Discretion is the better part of valor.

That lesson came to mind last Tuesday after the announcement of the cancellation of the debate between the Vice President and his tormentor in the Senate. Probably out of frustration at being constantly told to attend the Senate hearings on allegations of corruption and ill-gotten/hidden wealth, the VP said he would not attend the Senate “inquisition” and instead challenged the senator to a debate, a lawyer’s equivalent of “let’s take this fight outside.” The senator accepted.

The VP’s family and supporters had been unanimous in saying he should not push through with this debate, as he should not appear before the Senate hearings. Indeed, he had little to gain and much to lose, while his opponent had much to gain and little to lose. The perception was that here was a former soldier and coup plotter facing off against a lawyer and seasoned politician in a war of words.

After several fits and starts, the date (Nov. 27) and place (PICC), even the “referee” (the KBP), were finally set – and then boom, on his birthday he told reporters, “Huwag na natin ituloy. Ayoko na...”

At this point, no matter how hard he tries to explain, what reason/s he cites – “ I don’t want to appear that I am taking advantage of it,” “I don’t want to be accused of being opportunistic and oppressive” – the general view is he chickened out. When I got home from work that night, my househelper greeted me with, “Ay, duwag pala yung manok mo!” I thought she was talking about some (mis)adventure my feisty little dog Poopie had gotten himself into again, but she said, “Si Binay, umurong sa debate. Duwag pala.”

Probably on an impulse he had thrown down the gauntlet, and found himself in a position where he was “forced to good.” I cannot say I fault him for backing out of a no-win (for him) situation; but I would have thought a shrewd and seasoned politico like him would know better than to issue such a challenge in the first place.

Discretion is, indeed, the better part of valor, and of bravado.