Who says history is stagnant? For a historian, facts do not change it is the way we look at things, our interpretations, that are always changing. This is what makes history exciting - that we can always find something new in what is old.

I guess if you go around with famous people you are assured of some reflected (or deflected) glory.

It is ironic that many Filipinos learn to love the Philippines while abroad, not at home.

Rizal learned the right ideas at the wrong time, and for this he was shot.

A historian can never claim to have the last word on anything as he is limited by his sources and further so by his viewpoint.

Filipinos are not a reading people, and despite the compulsory course on the life and works of Rizal today, from the elementary to the university levels, it is accepted that the 'Noli me Tangere' and 'El Filibusterismo' are highly regarded but seldom read (if not totally ignored). Therefore one asks, how can unread novels exert any influence?

Sometimes it pays not to be interested in what happened but in what did not happen.

As you can see, there are quite a number of things taught in school that one has to unlearn or at least correct.

School made us 'literate' but did not teach us to read for pleasure.