There are layers of places that we use to identify ourselves when asked by people we encountered in different locations.
In my case, I live in “Lasola Drive in barangay Piapi” when asked by someone in Dumaguete; or “from Dumaguete” when asked by someone somewhere in Negros Oriental; or “from Negros Oriental” when asked when I’m in Cebu or in other provinces.
And I am proud to tell those who ask that I am “from Dumaguete” because Silliman University — where I have become what I am now — is located in this beloved City.
Meanwhile, the broadening reference of our place is a usual case as our perspective has likewise widened corresponding to the locations of encounters.
I would identify myself as a Filipino when asked in the countries of Asia, and I am an Asian when asked in other continents like in the Americas. And the place we identify with is assumed frequently by other people to reflect who we are and what we can do–termed as stereotyping. The act of stereotyping is also a way of differentiating people and places.
A stereotype is either positive or negative, and we tend to associate more with the favorable descriptions about our group or place where we reside because these are instrumental in satisfying some interests, both personal and societal. We believe that to satisfy certain interest is possible if we project a pleasing picture of our group or place.
Thus, place identity is not merely to identify and locate a place, but a signal about how the residents have loved and protected it.
Place identity as a component of the sense of place pertains to the manner and extent individuals perceived a particular location as an extension of their being.
This description further suggests that their identity is a reflection of the said place.
The link is emotional, which explains why place identity is closely related to place attachment.
Thus, a person with a high place attachment score also has a high place identity score. And not only had the natives shared this, but also the migrants who considered certain place their second home. A number of the current cultural mappers of Dumaguete belong to the latter group.
The cultural mapping in Dumaguete, currently being coordinated by the City Tourism Office, is not merely to compile the natural and cultural treasures within the different barangays of the city.
As a process, it is to gauge how much the residents have known about the social, cultural, economic, and political life and history of the city.
As a product, it increases the cultural awareness and appreciation of the residents of the richness of the heritage of the City.
This will drive them to rally behind its protection and preservation for the enjoyment also of future generations.
In fact, during the training, some cultural mappers were excited to have learned new information about the heritage sites of Dumaguete. And this had inspired them to commit their time and skills to the cultural mapping program of the city.
Meanwhile, there were historical questions that emerged during the training of local cultural mappers, which have relevance to place identity marker.
For example, was it Jose Rizal who called Dumaguete as the “City of Gentle People”? Is the name Dumaguete coined from a Bisayan word dagit?
The “City of Gentle People” was immediately accepted, and has become a marketing label for Dumaguete.
At the same time, only the positive side of the word dagit, which means to allure, is being promoted, and this is evident in the #DumaGeTmE, displayed in the Pantawan in the northern side of the Rizal Boulevard.
“To seize” or “abduct” was put aside because of its negative connotation or the stereotype of violence.
I will not resolve the matter here now so as not to pre-empt the works of the cultural mappers who have been assigned to deal with such questions.
But it is amusing to note that we have been promoting Dumaguete using these labels, and we may actually be wrong.
We have also taught these identity markers to school children–which they have since accepted as accurate.
This now demands a closer analysis of historical documents.
The cultural mappers are urged to revisit the taken-for- granted or commonly-accepted identity markers so that the many misconceptions about Dumaguete may be corrected.
Before I end here this week, let’s do a little exercise. Ponder on the following statements that measure “place identity”. Rate each statement from 1 to 4 based on the extent that you disagree or agree with it, with 4 as the statement with which you agree the most:
“Dumaguete is a reflection of my being me.”
“Dumaguete is congruent to the type of person that I am.”
“Dumaguete is important to my family heritage.”
“Dumaguete is the place where I belong.”
If you get a mean score closest to four, then you have a higher place identity. If your mean score is closest to one, then you have a lower place identity.
_____________________________________
Author’s email: [email protected]
