Carlos vs. Manuel
Carlos Bulosan and Manuel Arguilla are both very good writers because they've both captured the eyes of foreign readers at a time where Filipinos are discriminated. They both used the english language in writing. They were both Ilokanos. They both died young. If they have many common things, then who is better in terms of writing?
I first read Carlos Bulosan's story “My Father Goes To Court” and I understood it the first time I read the story. Maybe it's because of the simplicity of the words, it's interesting and it's a comedy. I had a good time reading Carlos' piece of work. I find it really interesting. After that, I read Manuel Arguilla's story “How My Brother Leon Brought Home A Wife” which, I had some difficulties in understanding. The words are too descriptive that it tends to pile up in my mind and never got to visualize what was happening. I also got confused in the first part of the story. I didn't know who was talking. The first, it was Baldo, then it was Leon. I even thought that Labang was a human being until I read that Labang has horns. I didn't find the story interesting because unlike “My Father Goes To Court”, “How My Brother Leon Brought Home A Wife”'s plot can happen on any normal day. A very simple plot can really get confusing because the reader might think that “this is it?”. If they read Carlos' story, they'll get the plot.
Carlos' Bulosan's work is simple but interesting while Manuel Arguilla's story is simple but not that interesting. Manuel Arguilla is known to make the readers visualize the things that is happening to the story. That's good enough but his stories like “How My Brother Leon Brought Home A Wife” and “Midsummer” have such very simple plots that happen everyday, which makes his story less interesting. In the other hand, Carlos Bulosan can still make the readers imagine what is happening like on what he did in his story “My Father Goes To Court” when the sister got pregnant and then suddenly a frog jumps out and almost burned the house down. He didn't get too descriptive unlike Manuel Arguilla who gets too descriptive especially in the details of something.
Manuel Arguilla's stories are clearly focused on love stories. Maybe that's why his “visualizing technique” doesn't work on all readers because love stories doesn't need to be that descriptive about the details. I remember in midsummer how he described the girl in the story “Midsummer” when she got her shirt wet. Manuel Arguilla described what she looked in every little detail. He didn't need to describe fully what she looked but what can I do? That's just Manuel's style of writing. I wonder why he didn't write a story that isn't a love story. Let's say like a comedy. Maybe there is a non-love story that Manuel wrote that I haven't read yet.
If I'll make a conclusion based on what I've read, I'd pick Carlos Bulosan simply because it's interesting.
