Oblation in Ilocos Norte

 Laoag City’s Central Plaza is flanked by interesting sculptures, facing the Provincial Capitol is an Oblation-like sculpture which has no markers bearing its significance. On the side facing the River, there is a brick monument commemorating the abolition of the Tobacco Monopoly in the Philippines.

An interesting structure for travelers in Laoag City is the Oblation-like statue in front of the Ilocos Norte Capitol bldg.One will wonder the rationale for using the UP Icon in an area where there is no UP unit , and the main difference is that the arms are stretched backwards on a downward direction along with the head more tilted to the back.

Oblation's real model is not FPJ's father..

National Artist Guillermo Tolentino (center)  with Esteban Caedo (left) and Prof. Anastacio  Caedo (right). 

We have heard this  story before, and perhaps even helped spread them.  Upperclassmen have passed on these tales to gullible, innocent freshmen. A classmate heard it from another classmate, who then told you, and perhaps you told another. But is there any truth to these stories?

The model for the Oblation is the father of the late action star. 

The Oblation is a concrete statue by Filipino artist Guillermo E. Tolentino which serves as the iconic symbol of the University of the Philippines. It depicts a man facing upward with arms outstretched, symbolizing selfless offering of oneself to his country. The concrete sculpture painted to look like bronze, measures 3.5 meters in height, symbolizing the 350 years of Spanish rule in the Philippines

If you are an Isko, perhaps the most common name a person hears when he or she is asked who modeled for the Oblation—Fernando Poe Sr. People faced with this question, reply in varying tones, ranging from the certain, “Yung tatay ni Fernando Poe Jr.” (the father of Fernando Poe Jr.) to the unsure, “Sabi si Fernando Poe Sr. daw” (people say it was allegedly Fernando Poe Sr.). Poe Sr. was a UP student around the time the Oblation was being created by National Artist Guillermo Tolentino who was then a professor at the UP School of Fine Arts. No one knows for sure how the rumor started, but speculation about his involvement in the creation of the prominent UP landmark remains to this day. 

 

His name may be the most popular answer but other names come up, too. And researches revealed that oblation's model was  Fine Arts Prof. Anastacio Caedo, who was Tolentino’s student assistant at the time. He has to share the credit, however, with Virgilio Raymundo, brother of Paz Raymundo Tolentino, the creator’s wife. Tolentino combined Caedo’s physique with Raymundo’s proportion and – voila! – The Oblation was born. This is according to the book written and designed by the late UP Diliman College of Fine Arts (UPD CFA) Prof. Rodolfo Paras-Perez titled Tolentino.

 

The idea for the Oblation was first conceived during the presidency of Rafael Palma, who was the one to commission Tolentino to make the sculpture. Palma requested that the statue would be based on the second verse of Rizal's Mi Ultimo Adios;

“

In fields of battle, deliriously fighting, Others give you their lives, without doubt, without regret; Where there’s cypress, laurel or lily, On a plank or open field, in combat or cruel martyrdom, If the home or country asks, it's all the same--it matters not.

The sculpture is replete with references of selfless dedication and service to the nation, and as Tolentino himself describes it;

“

The completely nude figure of a young man with outstretched arms and open hands, with tilted head, closed eyes and parted lips murmuring a prayer, with breast forward in the act of offering himself, is my interpretation of that sublime stanza. It symbolizes all the unknown heroes who fell during the night. The statue stands on a rustic base, a stylized rugged shape of the Philippine archipelago, lined with big and small hard rocks, each of which represents an island. The “katakataka” (wonder plant) whose roots are tightly implanted on Philippine soil, is the link that binds the symbolized figure to the allegorical Philippine Group. “Katakataka” is really a wonder plant. It is called siempre vivo (always alive) in Spanish. A leaf or a piece of it thrown anywhere will sprout into a young plant. Hence, it symbolizes the deep-rooted patriotism in the heart of our heroes. Such patriotism continually and forever grows anywhere in the Philippines.

”

(Portion of the article lifted from The UP Newsletter - March 2012 - (Vol xxxiii Issue 3) Tales from UP Diliman: fact or fiction?)

Taking UP Oblation's picture a restricted/prohibited act?

I almost got into a heated argument  with the security-in-charge at the UP Admin bldg when they tried to stop us from taking this photo as he said that it is prohibited to take such photo. I answered back with an irritated voice "Graduate ako ng UP twice: School of Econ and College of Law. This is my university. You cannot stop me."

The security personnel sort of panicked when i begun raising my voice  and said that i am a lawyer  especialy when i asked the reason. His answer  "basta bawal" or it is just prohibited.  

After posting said picture in my facebook account. a discussion ensued and someone said there was indeed an order restricting/ prohibiting picture taking of oblation,  I  guess they will use the  "trademark" argument as their rationale for the prohibition  but that runs counter to the "academic freedom" that we are so proud of as UP graduates. In the first place,  i will use the photo for my personal use'

my  oble photo taken in early 90s during my collegian days

I found out in the internet that  On 4 August 2006. UP President  EMERLINDA R. ROMAN issued Administrative Order No. PERR-06-55:  "Trademark over the Name University of the Philippines, the Official UP Logo and the Oblation" which states:

      "The UP name and seal is now a registered trademark exclusively belonging to the University of the Philippines.The name “University of the Philippines”, the official logo of theUniversity of the Philippines, the Oblation or any derivative of these marks are registered trademarks of the University of the Philippines.
        To protect its goodwill, the UP shall actively prosecute any person or entity engaged in any commercial transaction involving any product containing these marks not covered by any licensing agreement dulyapproved by the University of the Philippines.
       No UP unit, academic or non-academic personnel shall be allowed to use or purchase any product bearing our registered trademarks from unauthorized sources. This includes “blue books”, examinationbooklets, t-shirts, wearing apparel, bags, hats, pens, pencils, stickers, et al.
       Duly recognized student, academic and administrative organizations may continue to use UP name and logo in accordance with existing guidelines. However, the commercialization of any product bearing these registered marks must be covered by the proper license agreements. Other organizations wishing to use the name and logo of the University of the Philippines shall apply for accreditation with the Vice President for Development.
       The Vice President for Legal Affairs by himself or, at his discretion, through any of the legal offices in any constituent university, is authorized to commence and prosecute the proper administrative, civil and criminal actions necessary to protect the goodwill of the University of the Philippines. Application for licenses shall be addressed to the Vice President for Development. The Office of the President shall approve all licensing agreements."

   

          When i researched further on this aspect, i looked into the website of the Intellectual Property Office (IPO)  and found out that two registration certificates for  the "oblation" trademark were issued to UP. The first was issued on April 28, 2006 covering serviced under class 41 (EDUCATIONAL SERVICES) but was later cancelled by the IPO. Then UP refiled .it in July 1, 2009 now covering more classes, to wit, 41 ( EDUCATIONAL SERVICES) and 16 (BOOKS, BLUEBOOKS, PAMPHLET, JOURNALS, STICKERS).The registration certificate was issued on July 16, 2010.

      In the first cancelled  registration, the oblation was described as " A NUDE YOUNG MAN, HEAD GAZING UPWARD AND ARMS OUTSTRETCHED IN QUIET OFFERING." On the other hand, the new issued registration, oblation was more specifically described as " A COMPLETELY NUDE FIGURE OF A YOUNG MAN WITH OUTSTRETCHED ARMS AND OPEN HANDS, WITH TILTED HEAD, CLOSED EYES AND PARTED LIPS MURMURING A PRAYER, WITH BREAST FORWARD IN THE ACT OF OFFERING HIMSELF."


            Section 22 of the Trademark Law holds a person liable for infringement when, among others, he "uses without the consent of the registrant, any reproduction, counterfeit; copy or colorable imitation of any registered mark or tradename in connection with the sale, offering for sale, or advertising of any goods, business or services or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion or mistake or to deceive purchasers or others as to the source or origin of such goods or services, or identity of such business; or reproduce, counterfeit, copy or colorably imitate any such mark or tradename and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisements intended to be used upon or in connection with such goods, business or services."

  
     Thus, i think the security personnel should be "debriefed" that picture taking of oble per se is not prohibited but the " commercial transaction involving any product containing the marks not covered by any licensing agreement duly
approved by the University of the Philippines."

After doing some more  research in the web, i also chanced upon this posting on legal issues of photography http://www.photosecrets.com/can-i-take-this-photo.html

"The are no general laws against taking photos. Photography is considered an artistic expression which, if anything, is protected not prohibited.

The laws that do affect photographers are mostly about the subject of the photo. The laws are there to defend the subject’s property and prevent you from “stealing” what is valuable to someone else.

The property in question can be: a person’s image and reputation (privacy); artwork (copyright); business reputation (trademark); land (trespassing). We know that you don’t intend to steal someone’s property, we just want to make sure that you do so inadvertently.

Private Property

You can photograph whatever you can freely see. If the public is allowed to enter, then you can take photographs. This includes shopping malls, the lobbies of office buildings, parks, and shops. If a place is open to the public then permission to enter (and thus photograph) is assumed. However, that permission can be revoked. If you are asked to leave and do not, you are then trespassing, which is a separate issue.

What if someone says not to shoot?

They don’t have a legal right to stop you from taking photographs, and they can’t threaten you or demand your camera. Only law enforcement officers (and officers of the court) can do that, and only with a court order or while making an arrest. Anyone else can be charged with a variety of things such as coercion, harassment, conversion, false imprisonment, kidnapping, assault, violation of constitutional rights, or theft. The only thing a private security person can do is ask you to leave the premises.

“In general, it is unlawful for anyone to instill a fear that they may injure you, damage or take your property, or falsely accuse you of a crime just becuase you are taking photographs.”
—The Photographer’s Right, by Bert P. Krages II

What if a mall security guard says to stop taking photos?

This comes down to photographing and trespassing being two different things. If a private security guard asks you to stop taking photos, you do not have to comply; you can still take photos. But if they ask you leave, then you have to leave, as your permission to enter has been revoked and you are now trespassing. However, you can take photos while walking out, and you can still publish those pictures. 

Perhaps a reaction on this issue, i recently saw a posting  dated  April 5, 2011 at the  UP website which says:

"Non-commercial picture-taking at UP Diliman allowed

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

You are free to have your picture or video taken at any landmark of UP Diliman (including the Oblation statue in front of Quezon Hall). The only time you will need a written permit from the Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Community Affairs (OVCCA) is if your photograph or footage is for "commercial use." In this case, you have to write a letter to OVCCA at least two days before your photo or video"