1 Introduction
As part of a book on Sinitic languages in Southeast Asia, particularly those that are increasingly endangered, this chapter emphasizes âSinophoneâ and âSinitic voicesâ in the Philippines. Briefly defined, the Sinophone landscape involves Sinitic languages, including Hokkien, and the associated cultures and communities which historically experienced colonialism and have increasingly been marginalized in more recent times.1 Here I focus on Sinophone speech, including the soundscapes in which speech is embedded, through theatrical performance in Hokkien. Kaoka was once a popular form of entertainment in Southeast Asia, but the Philippines is the only country in the region that still performs this theatrical art today. I furthermore aim to highlight the diversity of Sinophonic representations as seen in Kaoka playscripts. In these sources, only the phonetic elements have been preserved, whereas the logographic representations (known as Sinographs or Hanzi
The people from south Fujian, known as the Hokkiens (ban lam lang
Despite their long-time involvement and significance in Southeast Asia, studies on the language and culture of the Hokkien community in the Philippines remain limited. This chapter draws on various disciplines â including linguistics, sociology, anthropology, and religious studies â to achieve a more well-rounded understanding of the topic, especially when sources are scant. Henning Klöterâs (2011) work on Early Manila Hokkien (EMH) is noteworthy, as he engaged in a pioneering study of this significant but otherwise largely ignored area. The study of EMH attests to the important role played by the Hokkien community as early as the seventeenth century. A comparative study of the Kaoka texts and EMH, as will be attempted here, can reveal some trends and changes in the development of the Hokkien vernacular in the Philippines. It furthermore underscores some local specificities of Sinophone culture,3 by investigating how the Hokkien spoken in the Philippines differs from that of other parts of Southeast Asia and Fujian. In the 1980s, Gloria Chan Yap conducted a comprehensive study on Hokkien loanwords in Tagalog (Yap 1980). A more recent study by Wilkinson Daniel Wong Gonzales on Philippine Hybrid Hokkien (PHH) substantiates the continued importance and relevance of Hokkien among the Chinese population in the Philippines (Gonzales 2018). Yet despite these illuminating studies, there are some distinct differences between spoken Philippine Hokkien and language of the Kaoka texts. The latter forms this chapterâs main focus of analysis.
Kaoka in the Philippines has existed for a century, but scholarly discussions on this theatrical form remain scant. Noting the popularity of various theatrical forms brought along by successive waves of migration from China to Southeast Asia, Chinese scholars occasionally mention Kaoka in the Philippines, but information remains scattered.4 Despite their lack of a coherent analysis, these studies remain important as they provide a basic understanding of the way Kaoka developed â especially before the Second World War (1942â45) â which is lacking in English scholarship. Sources about Kaoka written by Filipino Chinese, also known as Tsinoys, are equally noteworthy, as they represent their efforts and interest to document a traditional theatrical form from their home country. Anson Yu, for example, is a heritage enthusiast and has written a number of articles on Kaoka. Two of his articles were published in Tulay, a fortnightly Filipino Chinese newspaper still in print today (Yu 2007, 2013). There is also a study by Percy G. Ng on the socio-historical context of the genre. This authorâs interviews of present-day Kaoka performers have been particularly useful for my own research (Ng 2016). Josh Stenbergâs recent publication on Chinese opera (
This chapter combines two main research objectives. First, it provides a succinct timeline indicating when Kaoka was transmitted to the Philippines â from its period of transmission up to the present day â as previous literature outlining this development is absent. Second, it conducts a preliminary analysis on the Kaoka playscripts, which can contribute to an understanding of the sociolinguistics of the Filipino Hokkien community, including the documentation of this theatrical form once popular across Southeast Asia but today only known in the Philippines.
2 Kaoka in the Philippines: Past and Present
Chinese migration and settlement in the Philippines was relatively early compared to counterparts elsewhere in Southeast Asia. There is evidence indicating Chinese presence prior to the arrival of the Spanish in the sixteenth century.5 However, it is questionable to assume that Kaoka appeared in this period.6 My conviction, that Kaoka appeared in the Philippines during the early twentieth century, is supported by a number of observations.7 Kaoka â pronounced as kau-kah in the Southern Min (
Two associations for traditional southern Fujianese music (
From the 1920s to 1930s, the repertoire staged by the Kaoka performers typical of traditional theatre in south Fujian, including Flood at Jinshan Temple (
The performance of Kaoka came to an abrupt halt with the outbreak of the Second World War and the Japanese occupation of the Philippines. Kaoka performances that catered for traditional celebrations, such as weddings, birthdays for elders, and religious festivities, resumed after the war (Bai 2011: 65). While it would appear that the cultural and entertainment scene was similar to the pre-War situation, the socio-political climate â most notably after the Philippinesâ declaration of independence in 1946 and the outbreak of the Cold War in 1947 â had a drastic impact on international and familial relations. This in turn affected Kaoka. Taiwan, instead of mainland China, soon became a close ally of the Philippines, especially because of geopolitical and ideological concerns. The post-War era also saw the increasing reliance of both the Republic of China (ROC) in Taiwan and of the Philippines on the United States.16 Their alliance was further heightened by the containment strategy adopted by the United States during the Cold War. Sharing a common ancestral origin with the Taiwanese, the Chinese in the Philippines, particularly those of south Fujian origins, also began to demonstrate closer cultural affiliations with the former.
As mentioned earlier, the Nanyin associations played a significant role in bringing Kaoka performances in the Philippines to their peak during the 1920s. Although the political climate of the post-War period went through a dramatic transition, the role of Nanyin and its theatrical forms continued to be â to quote Tan and Rao in their definition of Sino-soundscapes â âintentionally produced and created in ways to register distinctive identity and articulate cultural positions in particular placesâ (Tan & Rao 2016: 6). This form of cultural exchange between Taiwan and the Philippines was evident.
During the Cold War era, Taiwanese troupes allowed to travel overseas were often backed by a political agenda, exemplified by the slogan ârepel the Communists and resist the Sovietsâ (
3 Local Kaoka Establishments
Socio-political developments after the Second World War did not dampen the enthusiasm of the Filipino Chinese for Kaoka. The Philippines became one of the major centres in Southeast Asia to organize Kaoka-related activities. Another factor that prompted local developments and establishments of Kaoka troupes was the inability of many performers and musicians to return to their hometown due to the civil war between the Nationalists and the Communists and the resulting political instability in mainland China. Since there was a strong support for Kaoka, they decided to settle or temporarily remain in the Philippines (Fei hua 2007: 842). In 1950, the Shengxing troupe
The 1970s was a watershed for Kaoka in the Philippines, which saw a change in the enthusiasm and support for this form of traditional theatre. Locally established troupes performed in the traditional context, that is, an outdoor stage erected near or within the temple compound.20 As mentioned earlier, local troupes performed on the feast days of deities during the 1950s and 1960s. These outdoor performances came to a halt when then President Ferdinand E. Marcos issued Proclamation No. 1081 on 21 September 1972, declaring martial law in the Philippines.21 The martial law period (1972â81) meant that curfews were enforced throughout the country that lasted from 12 midnight to 4 in the morning. Those found loitering on the streets at these hours were detained. The curfew affected Kaoka performances, which could previously go on for hours till near midnight. For fear of being detained or questioned, the patrons of Kaoka diminished. With a sharp drop in audiences and supporters, temple invitations of Kaoka troupes were drastically affected too. For example, a seven-day performance was reduced to three days, which greatly impacted on the livelihood of troupes (Ng 2016: 57). Today in Binondo (known as Manilaâs Chinatown), Kaoka performances are staged inside the temple premises without any stage setup (Fig. 6.1).
Kaoka performance inside Qing Long Dian without any stage setup
Own work
The Hoc Kian troupe led by Teresita Chan has been selected for this chapter, particularly because the troupe leader was associated with older local establishments. These include the founders of the Shengxing troupe, who were her teachers, and Kim Siu Eng of the Kim Siu Eng troupe, who was a personal teacher and foster mother of Teresita Chan. During my fieldwork conducted in Manila and Bulacan in 2017, the Hoc Kian troupe appeared to be quite active and within a week, I observed two performances respectively at Si Wang Fu (
From my observation on the Hoc Kian troupe led by Teresita Chan, it appears that she conforms to the traditional context as much as possible in terms of the music, repertoire, and performance. All these aspects contribute to the sustenance of the Sino-soundscape as expected by the larger traditional Filipino Chinese community. This sustained Sinophone heritage is also evident in the textual representation of Kaoka. Teresita Chan revealed that her proficiency in Chinese, whether spoken or written, was low, as she did not pay a lot of attention to learning the language during her school days. However, the knowledge or craft literacy required for Kaoka meant that she had to learn various aspects of the Sinophone: knowing the Chinese characters (Sinographs) of the repertoire and creating romanizations of the Hokkien vernacular, in this case the Kaoka playscripts, so that performers could learn them.22
The repertoire, as presented in Table 6.1, is an outline of various story titles (Fig. 6.2) written by Teresita Chan by hand, including in a non-standard orthography shown in the leftmost column. For story titles that contain non-standard orthographic characters, I have included the corresponding standardized characters to provide the reader with a better sense of the story or main character in relation to the traditional Hokkien theatre or other Chinese opera forms. For example, Wang Lihua Descends from the Mountains (
An image of part of the repertoire written by Teresita Chan
Own work
Repertoire of the Hoc Kian troupe
Own work
As observed in this repertoire, themes that frequently appear include travelling to the Capital, invasions, and descending from mountains. The phrase âtravelling to the Capitalâ can suggest the emphasis on scholarly pursuit often associated with civil plays (wenxi
4 A Preliminary Analysis of the Kaoka Playscripts
To my knowledge, the Kaoka playscripts created by Teresita Chan, the current troupe leader of the Hoc Kian troupe in the Philippines, have not received any academic attention. Teresita Chan saw the need to write these playscripts so that new performers, especially those who started with little or no proficiency in Hokkien, can learn the lines. She mentioned to me that her teachers taught her the lines orally, so there was no text prior to her creation. These playscripts attest to the existence of a particular Sino-soundscape as mentioned earlier, notably in Southeast Asia and beyond (Taiwan and Kinmen in particular).24 The Philippines is currently the only location within this Sino-soundscape that has sustained the theatrical form closely associated with Nanyin.25 While Nanyin itself is still performed in other sites in this Sino-soundscape, Kaoka has not been able to âwithstandâ the popularity of Gezai opera, its more modern counterpart from Taiwan, as the latter adopts a musical style distinct from Nanyin. The fondness for Nanyin can be regarded as a marker of Filipino Chinese identity, as I argue in this chapter, which has allowed Kaoka to survive in the Philippines. As Kim Chew Ng noted, âa writer in China or Taiwan is perhaps preordained to write in the Sinitic script. Abroad, especially in a country where Hua people are oppressed and regarded as a minority, a writerâs choice of the Sinitic script involves a serious value judgement and has significance in terms of cultural identity ⦠th[is] decision ⦠requires an exertion of effort, as the language is something that must be âacquiredââ (Ng 2013: 79). The Kaoka playscripts also represent the consistent effort by practitioners to sustain this tradition, even if many do not have the proficiency to write Chinese characters. For the Hoc Kian opera troupe, I have observed that older performers are of Chinese descent, that is, one of their parents or both are Chinese, whereas the younger performers are Filipinos with no Chinese descent. Some of the older performers communicated with me in Mandarin, while Teresita Chan, the troupe leader, communicated in Hokkien and some English. The Kaoka playscripts (Fig. 6.3) are essential learning materials for the performers, especially the younger generation who often start out without any proficiency in Hokkien.
An image of a Kaoka playscript by the Hoc Kian troupe, photo taken by author with permission of the troupe
Own work
Taking a closer look at the playscripts, they are written in a style quite different from the aforementioned studies on colloquial Hokkien varieties in the Philippines. Compared to studies on the more contemporary version of Hokkien, the Kaoka texts reflect less everyday usage and more theatrical language, in which the performers were specialized. In analysing the selected playscripts, I have also discovered the occurrence of stock phrases commonly used among Hokkien performers outside the Philippines, which will be further discussed below.
Studying these Kaoka playscripts has been challenging, as there are a number of linguistic skills required to provide an informed analysis. First, not being a native from the Philippines meant that I was unaware of how Tagalog has influenced the romanized Hokkien script in use. To overcome this lack of proficiency, I consulted with Filipino native speakers who were not ethnically Chinese or Chinese-descended, which meant that they did not speak Hokkien (Ban-lam-ue). They provided some insight about the explanatory notes written in Tagalog, noting that some of the words were misspelt, possibly due to the limited literacy of the scribe or the fact that the script was an earlier form of Tagalog â although the precise time period of the script is unclear â that is less common today.26 Secondly, knowing Hokkien is useful to analyse the texts, but this is particularly the case when researching colloquial Philippine Hokkien varieties. The Kaoka playscripts additionally require knowledge of the theatrical language, particularly the one used in Hokkien theatre, in which I have acquired proficiency given my background in this field. To help me with this chapterâs preliminary analysis, I have also consulted with different people proficient in both Hokkien and Tagalog, and used various Quanzhou, Zhangzhou and Taiwanese dictionaries as references.27
The theatrical language in romanized Hokkien is an important characteristic of the Kaoka playscripts. Table 6.2 illustrates the corresponding Chinese characters that are pronounced (and romanized) differently in the literary and colloquial styles. This reflects a broader phenomenon in the Hokkien language (see also Ding and Churchman in this volume), which is said to be one of the most complex among the Chinese regional languages in terms of differences in colloquial and literary reading (wenbai yidu
Performers of traditional Hokkien theatre use a mix of literary and colloquial registers. For example, characters involving learned men, officials, and the royal court speak and sing more in the literary style, whereas those of a lower status, such as the commoners, use a more colloquial form. Performers tend to acquire or learn phrases in literary style as stock phrases, so that they can be applied whenever the need arises. Some examples of these stock phrases in the literary style also exist in the Kaoka playscripts, as listed in Table 6.3:
The stock phrases listed in Table 6.3 are found in the Kaoka playscripts and display similarities with the theatrical language that I have studied elsewhere (Chia 2018: 31, Table 6.3). Such similarities demonstrate that Kaoka performers in the Philippines adhere to the language and performance conventions observed in Hokkien theatre more generally.
Stock phrases of literary Hokkien observed in the Kaoka playscripts
There are about 35 to 40 Kaoka playscripts that I was given permission to read and document. As it is not possible to cover all within this chapter, I will provide an overview of the playscripts. A number of the texts include translations into Tagalog and appear to be general lines for performers. The Gi Hua Wan (
For the purposes of this chapter, I have selected one playscript for detailed analysis, titled Ong Le Hua Ha Shan (
To investigate the nature of the Kaoka playscripts, I first observed whether the scribe has a personal style of writing the romanized Hokkien and whether the same word is romanized consistently. From my initial observation, I noticed that words ending in â¨ayâ© correspond to /ai/ in the default Hokkien romanization. Examples include lay (lai
Romanizations in the Ong Le Hua playscript
Table 6.5 includes the Kaoka text of Ong Le Hua Descends from the Mountains, along with the default Hokkien romanization in the second column. The purpose of juxtaposing both romanizations is to illustrate that the Kaoka playscript adheres quite closely to a general Hokkien romanization. As mentioned before, the Hokkien romanization provided here is informed by Quanzhou, Xiamen, Zhangzhou, and Taiwanese dictionaries. Where these varieties differ internally, I indicate those differences in footnotes or with a slash (/). I have verified this playscript with Teresita Chan, but there are challenges, as she does not write much Chinese and the script also has a number of versions, including the one she remembers and one copied by her student and current Kaoka performer Raquel Espena. I have used the latter playscript because Teresita indicated that she currently does not have the physical copy of the former and the photographs she provided were too blurry to decipher. Although versions differ, the essential content â particularly the role of Venerable Mother of Mount Li, the way she predicted that Ong Le Huaâs father would be trapped by foreign invaders, and her advice to Ong Le Hua to descend from the mountains to save her father â has helped me to decipher the text. However, it should be noted that without the context it is difficult to determine the meaning and corresponding Chinese characters, especially when the romanized script has no tonal indication, such that one romanized word can correspond to many characters of the same pronunciation.
Analysis of the Ong Le Hua Ha Shan playscript with Chinese and English
5 Concluding Remarks
This study of Kaoka, a traditional theatrical form originating from south Fujian and still performed in the Philippines today, illustrates the diversity and complexity of the Sinophone. Its two prisms of analysis â cultural and linguistic â are deeply intertwined. The timeline I have attempted to reconstruct of the development of Kaoka in the Philippines highlights the prevalence of Nanyin as the bedrock of the interconnected Sino-soundscape that developed among the various Hokkien communities in Southeast Asia and beyond, including Taiwan and Kinmen. It was Nanyin, as I have attempted to demonstrate, that was crucial to sustain the popularity, growth, and continued existence of Kaoka in the Philippines, as the latter has disappeared from other parts of Southeast Asia. The various features of the Kaoka playscripts discussed in the second part, including the colloquial and literary readings, illuminate the linguistic implications of this story. The colloquial-literary dichotomy is less observed in previous studies on Philippine Hokkien, partly because the literary forms are less frequent in everyday usage. However, as I have shown, it is nevertheless important to obtain a more textured sociohistorical picture in order to understand Kaoka and Hokkien theatre in general. In the Philippine context, language and performance have clearly reinvigorated each other. This analysis has furthermore illustrated the preservation and continued use of stock phrases commonly seen in Hokkien theatre elsewhere. The romanization of the Kaoka playscripts closely resembles the romanization of Hokkien in Quanzhou, Zhangzhou and Taiwan, conveying a sense that the creator of these scripts has attempted to adhere as closely as possible to the conventions of Hokkien theatre. In doing so, a unique fragment of the Sinophone lost elsewhere has been preserved in the Philippines.
References
Bai, Yonghua ç½åè¯, âZhanzhuan Dongnanya: Gaojiaxi haiwai bainian è¼¾è½æ±åäº: é«ç²æ²æµ·å¤ç¾å¹´ (1840â1940)â, Fujian luntan, renwen shehui kexue ban, 8 (2011): 64â68.
Chan Yap, Gloria, Hokkien Chinese borrowings in Tagalog (Pacific Linguistics, Series B, 71, Canberra: Australian National University, 1980).
Chen, Zhiping é³æ¯å¹³ and Xu Hong å¾æ³, Minnan wenhua baike quanshu é©åæåç¾ç§å ¨æ¸ (Fuzhou: Fujian renmin chubanshe, 2009).
Chia, Caroline, âGezai xi in Singapore: Oral transmission, improvisation and dependence on âFixed Textsââ, CHINOPERL, 37/1 (2018): 1â41.
Chia, Caroline, Hokkien theatre across the seas (Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2019).
âFei hua xiqu de xingqi è²è¯æ²æ²çèèµ· (â1945)â, in Zhou Ning (ed.), Dongnanya huayu xijushi (xiace) æ±åäºè¯èªæ²åå²ï¼ä¸åï¼, vol. 2 (Xiamen: Xiamen daxue chubanshe, 2007), 802â871.
âFujian sheng difangzhi bianji weiyuanhuiâ (ed.), Fujian sheng zhi, xiqu zhi ç¦å»ºçå¿ æ²æ²å¿ (Beijing: Fangzhi chubanshe, 2000).
Gonzales, Wilkinson Daniel Ong Wong Gonzales, âPhilippine Hybrid Hokkien as a Postcolonial Mixed Language: Evidence from Nominal Derivational Affixation Mixingâ (MA thesis, National University of Singapore, 2018).
Goody, Jack, Literacy in Traditional Societies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1975).
Hung, Wei-jen æ´ªæä», âShiliu shiqi shiji zhijian Lüsong de Zhangzhou fangyan åå ã ä¸ä¸ç´ä¹éåå®çæ¼³å·æ¹è¨â, Lishi dili æ·å²å°ç, 30 (2014): 215â238.
Klöter, Henning, The Language of the Sangleys: A Chinese vernacular in missionary sources of the seventeenth Century (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2011).
Lin, Huadong æè¯æ±, Quanzhou fangyan yanjiu æ³å·æ¹è¨ç 究 (Xiamen: Xiamen daxue chuban she, 2008).
Ministry of Education, Taiwan Minnanyu Changyongci cidian. https://twblg.dict.edu.tw/holodict_new/default.jsp.
Ng, Kim Chew, âSinophone/Chinese: âThe South where Language is lostâ and Reinvented, translated by Brian Bernardsâ, in Shu-mei Shih, Chien-hsin Tsai and Brian Bernards (eds.) Sinophone Studies: A Critical Reader (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013), 74â92.
Ng, Percy, âKao Ka, the Chinese Opera in the Philippines: A preliminary socio-historical studyâ (MA thesis, University of the Philippines Diliman, 2016).
Pan, Rongyang æ½æ¦®é½, âGaojiaxi yu Min-Tai shehui bianqian é«ç²æ²èé©å°ç¤¾æè®é·â, Dongnan Xueshu æ±åå¸è¡, 3 (2013): 219â225.
Ruizendaal, Robin, Marionette theatre in Quanzhou (Boston: Brill, 2006).
Shih, Jui-lou æ½çæ¨, âLukang Juying she Nanguanxi zhi yanchu ji âYichun liu shanâ shenfen zhi tan tao 鹿港èè±ç¤¾å管æ²ä¹æ¼åºå ã çæ¥çå ã 身段ä¹æ¢è¨ (MA thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, 2012).
Shih Shu-mei, âIntroduction: What Is Sinophone Studies?â, in Shih Shu-mei, Chien- Hsin Tsai and Brian Bernards (eds.), Sinophone Studies: A Critical Reader (New York: Columbia University Press, 2013), 1â16.
Stenberg, Josh, âXiqu in the Philippines: From Church Suppressions to MegaMall Showsâ, Journal of Chinese Overseas, 16 (2020): 58â89.
Tan, Sooi Beng and Nancy Yunhwa Rao, âIntroduction â emergent Sino-soundscapes: musical pasts, transnationalism and multiple identitiesâ, Ethnomusicology Forum, 25/1 (2016): 4â13.
Wickberg, Edgar, âHokkien-Philippines familial transnationalism, 1949â1975â, in Maria N. Ng and Philip Holden (eds.), Reading Chinese transnationalisms (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2006).
Wu, Shaojing å³å°é, âMinnan yinyue zai Dongnanya de chuanbo é©åé³æ¨å¨æ±åäºçå³æâ, Overseas Chinese Journal of Bagui, 4 (2006): 24â28.
Yu, Anson, âFading glory: Chinese opera in the Philippinesâ, Tulay Fortnightly (17 April 2007): 8â11.
Yu, Anson, âKaoka: A dying artâ, Tulay Fortnightly (October 22 to November 2013): 8â10.
Zhou, Changji å¨é·æ¥« (eds.), Minnan fangyan da cidian é©åæ¹è¨å¤§è©å ¸ (Fuzhou: Fujian renmin chubanshe, 2006).
Zhuang, Changjiang èé·æ±, Quannan Xi Shi Gou Chen æ³åæ²å²é¤æ² (Taipei: Guojia chubanshe, 2008).
Zhuang, Changjiang èé·æ±, Quanzhou xiban æ³å·æ²ç (Fuzhou: Fujian renmin chuban she, 2006).
Zhuang, Guotu èåå, Feilübin huaren tongshi è²å¾è³è¯äººéå² (Xiamen: Xiamen daxue chubanshe, 2012).
Part of this definition is adapted from the Cambria Sinophone World Series,
In this chapter, I use Hokkien interchangeably with Southern Min (ban-lam in the Hokkien vernacular, referring to south Fujian) unless otherwise stated, as the former continues to be a term commonly used to refer to people and the language from south Fujian. However, Dory Poa, a Filipino Chinese, has alerted me that the Filipino Chinese community, particularly those whose ancestral origin was from south Fujian, often refer to their language as ban lam ue
According to Shihâs pioneering study of the Sinophone (2013: 7), âSinophone culture is place-based and belongs to the place where it is producedâ.
Cf. Zhuang (2006), Bai (2011: 64â68), and Wu (2006).
In his study of the language of Early Manila Hokkien (EMH), Klöter (2011: 172â73) holds that the time period of early Chinese (known as Sangley) settlement was in the late fifteenth century.
Using a rich variety of Chinese, English, and Spanish sources, Stenberg (2020) has outlined the history of Chinese opera (xiqu) in the Philippines from the sixteenth century. However, as emphasized in the present chapter, it is unlikely that Kaoka appeared in the Philippines before the twentieth century. As my discussion is focused on Kaoka, other theatrical forms are beyond its scope.
This is also supported in a paper of somewhat ambiguous authorship (Fei hua 2007: 802, 809), which shows that when America defeated Spain towards the end of the nineteenth century and took over the latterâs control of the Philippines, their more relaxed rule led to the influx and flourishing of Chinese migrants and their hometown culture, including Kaoka. Some sources state that this paper was authored by Li Li
The term Kaoka is used throughout this chapter instead of Gaojia
According to Hung (2014), when the Spanish colonized the Philippines in 1571 and before Koxinga
Nanguan or Nanyin emerged during the Tang Dynasty. It was believed that during the reign of Emperor Xizong
These dates were obtained from Zhuang (2012: 764).
Scholars have different views on whether âNanyinâ theatre refers to Liyuan opera or Kaoka. There is also a third view, that Nanyin or Nanguan
The active years of the Luzon troupes slightly differ in Liâs source, namely 1921â23, 1921â22, and 1923â24. Due to the lack of other sources, we can only deduce that the Luzon troupes were active around the 1920s and possibly before the outbreak of the Second World War (Fei hua 2007; Bai 2011: 65â66). Note also that Nanyin in the Philippines existed during the nineteenth century, so the Luzon troupes would have existed before the establishment of some of the Nanyin associations. Further detail is beyond the scope of this chapter and will require more research.
This repertoire is given in Bai (2011: 65â66).
As Gaojia opera began to mature as an opera form complete with makeup, music, singing, stage movements, and storyline, it also developed the distinctive trait of featuring the clown character, to the extent that this character role became synonymous with the operatic form. The significance of the clown role in Gaojia opera is mentioned in Bai (2011: 66â67).
The policy of âgetting close to Taiwan and away from mainland Chinaâ (
For example, two Nanyin associations, namely Changhe Langjun she
Pan (2013: 222), cited in Stenberg (2020: 77).
Fei hua (2007: 842). Personal interview, Teresita Bee Hua Chan, 6 October 2017. For troupes where the actual spelling is not known, the hanyu pinyin version is used instead.
Unlike their predecessors, locally established troupes were said to perform in temple contexts and less so in indoor theatres (Fei hua 2007: 842). As recalled by Hau (2020) cited in Stenberg (2020: 72), makeshift stages performing Kaoka used to be erected on the streets.
Ng (2016: 56); Official Gazette, Declaration of Martial Law, retrieved 4 December 2019:
Craft literacy is regarded as special knowledge usually limited to a specialized group engaged in the same craft. For a more in-depth discussion on this, see Goody (1975).
As Ruizendaal (2006: 152) observes in his study of the marionette theatre in Quanzhou, âthe names of the plays were written on a traditional harmonica-like list ⦠the list was opened at the name of one play and placed on the altar and by the throw of the divination blocks the deity would decide which play(s) was to be performedâ.
Quite similar to the Philippines, Gaojia opera (Kaoka) was the more dominant theatrical form in Kinmen, compared to Gezai opera. The most recent record of a local Gaojia opera troupe was in 2000, but more research is required to understand the situation in Kinmen. For a contextual understanding, see Chia (2019: 76â79).
Stenberg (2020: 71â72) also notes that Nanyin (also known as Nanguan) musicians in the Philippines were pivotal in sustaining a related theatrical form in Taiwan, known as nanguan xi
I am grateful to Dr. Darlene Machell De Leon Espena from the Singapore Management University (SMU), who helped me with understanding the Tagalog translation in the Kaoka scripts. The topic of observed differences between the Tagalog translation and present-day Tagalog usage, which requires the expertise of Tagalog linguists, falls beyond the scope of this chapter. As the Tagalog sections provide explanatory notes, a general understanding sufficed to help me analyse the source text.
The dictionaries used in this analysis include Zhou (2006) and Taiwan Minnanyu Changyongci cidian.
Lin (2008: 49â51). Although Lin suggests that the most complex variety â in terms of such differences in literary and colloquial reading â is the Quanzhou vernacular, I think it is hard to measure its complexity. The coexistence of colloquial and literary readings applies to the Zhangzhou and Taiwanese vernaculars as well, although I will limit the discussion to the Kaoka playscripts.