Here are some of my other favorite biographies along with what are written on the back covers:

The Rose of Martinique: A Life of Napoleon's Josephine

One of the most remarkable women of the modern era, Josephine Bonaparte was born Rose de Tasher on her family's sugar plantation in Martinique. She embodied all the characteristics of a true Creole-sensuality, vivacity, and willfulness. Using diaries and letters, Andrea Stuart expertly re-creates Josephine's whirlwind of a life, which began with an isolated Caribbean childhood and led to a marriage that would usher her onto the world stage and crown her empress of France.

Josephine managed to be in the forefront of every important episode of her era's turbulent history: from the rise of the West Indian slave plantations that bankrolled Europe's rapid economic development, to the decaying of the ancien régime, to the French Revolution itself, from which she barely escaped the guillotine. Rescued from near starvation, she grew to epitomize the wild decadence of post-revolutionary Paris. It was there that Josephine first caught the eye of Napoleon Bonaparte. A true partner to Napoleon, she was equal parts political adviser, hostess par excellence, confidante, and passionate lover. In this captivating biography, Stuart brings her so utterly to life that we finally understand why Napoleon's last word before dying was the name he had given her: Josephine.


The Serpent and the Moon

Set against the stunning backdrop of Renaissance France, The Serpent and the Moon is a true story of love, war, intrigue, betrayal, and persecution. At its heart is one of the world's greatest love stories: the lifelong devotion of King Henri II of France to Diane de Poitiers, a beautiful aristocrat who was nineteen years older than her lover.

At age fourteen, Henri was married to fourteen-year-old Catherine de' Medici, an unattractive but extremely wealthy heiress who was to bring half of Italy to France as her dowry. When Catherine met Henri on her wedding day, she fell instantly in love, but Henri could see no one but the beautiful Diane. When Henri eventually became king, he and Diane ruled France as one. Meanwhile, Catherine took as her secret motto the words "Hate and Wait" and lived for the day Diane would die and she could win Henri's love and rule by his side. Fate had another plan.

Her Royal Highness Princess Michael of Kent, herself a descendant of both Catherine and Diane, imbues this seldom-told story with an insider's grasp of royal life. The Serpent and the Moon is a fascinating love story as well as a richly woven history of an extraordinary time.

Mary, Queen of Scots

She was the quintessential queen: statuesque, regal, dazzlingly beautiful. Her royal birth gave her claim to the thrones of two nations; her marriage to the young French dauphin promised to place a third glorious crown on her noble head. Instead, Mary Stuart became the victim of her own impulsive heart, scandalizing her world with a foolish passion that would lead to abduction, rape and even murder. Betrayed by those she most trusted, she would be lured into a deadly game of power, only to lose to her envious and unforgiving cousin, Elizabeth I. Here is her story, a queen who lost a throne for love, a monarch pampered and adored even as she was led to her beheading, the unforgettable woman who became a legend for all time.


Mistress to an Age: A Life of Madame de Stael

J. Christopher Herold vigorously tells the story of the fierce Madame de Stael, revealing her courageous opposition to Napoleon, her whirlwind affairs with the great intellectuals of her day, and her idealistic rebellion against all that was cynical, tyrannical, and passionless. Germaine de Stael's father was Jacques Necker, the finance minister to Louis XVI, and her mother ran an influential literary-political salon in Paris. Always precocious, at nineteen Germaine married the Swedish ambassador to France, Eric Magnus Baron de Stael-Holstein, and in 1785 took over her mother's salon with great success. Germaine and de Stael lived most of their married life apart. She had many brilliant lovers. Talleyrand was the first, Narbonne, the minister of war, another; Benjamin Constant was her most significant and long-lasting one. She published several political and literary essays, including "A Treatise on the Influence of the Passions upon the Happiness of Individuals and of Nations," which became one of the most important documents of European Romanticism. Her bold philosophical ideas, particularly those in "On Literature," caused feverish commotion in France and were quickly noticed by Napoleon, who saw her salon as a rallying point for the opposition. He eventually exiled her from France.

This winner of the 1959 National Book Award is "excellent ... detailed, full of color, movement, great names, and lively incident" -- The New York Times

"Mr. Herold's full-bodied biography is clear-eyed, intelligent, and written with abundant wit and zest." -- The Atlantic Monthly

I stayed up late last night reading Elizabeth the Queen by Alison Weir. It's a biography of Queen Elizabeth I of England, and chronicles her story from the time of her ascent to power until her death. Imagine, this lady was only twenty-five years old when she became queen. England was then considered an economic and military backwater, but by the end of her rule was one of the most powerful kingdoms in Europe.




Elizabeth I has always fascinated me. I've had a hard time looking for a biography of her in different bookstores. The only other book I found was The Pirate Queen, which was all about her state policies and not her private life.

Communal action

During the past several weeks, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) called for "communal action" in the wake of Jun Lozada's testimony in the Senate. The Hyatt 10, otherwise known as the rats who jumped ship when they thought it was sinking, interpreted this as a call for mass action to force the resignation of President Arroyo and accordingly "joined" it. The opposition also rose to the occasion with a rally in -- where else -- Makati. Some nut of an opinion writer, interpreting this as a call for warm bodies, even compared Lozada to Clarissa Ocampo, and said that the Church sealed Arroyo's fate when it called for communal action "for truth". And apparently, pitching in one's hard-earned pesos for the "upkeep" of a leech who corrupted millions is now an act of heroism.

The bishops have since clarified the statement, saying that it is a call for people to pray for peace, and not for Arroyo to step down. They explained that the statement was made in the context of the season of Lent.

While the CBCP mentioned corruption as the greatest shame of Filipinos and that “the country has long been captive to the corruption of people in governance,” Legaspi said the statement never called for mass action.

The context of the statement, Legaspi explained, is about the season of Lent, in which the Church is always calling for “moral revolution” and applying it to the country’s social situation today.

The statement also refers to finger-pointing attitude of many people when something bad happens to the country, the bishop added. “The call of the pastoral letter is that it’s the time for us to change our mental framework.”

“Let us also reflect on ourselves and the truth according to the essence of Lent,” Legaspi said. “Let’s start the transformation within ourselves and this is needed for all of us to act. That is the meaning of communal action.”

The Philippine Council of Evangelical Churches, meanwhile, affirmed its support for President Arroyo.

There is no doubt that many bishops support Lozada and Joey de Venecia. But the tempered statement of the bishops is, like previous statements on corruption issues hounding the administration, obviously as a result of public criticism of its interference in political affairs. The CBCP has clearly become more wary of appearing partisan or calling for anyone's resignation.

A letter from FR. RANHILIO CALLANGAN AQUINO, Dean, Graduate School of Law, San Beda College

San Beda College
Mendiola

Graduate School of Law

I am the Dean of the Graduate School of Juridical Science and Justice Studies (Graduate School of Law) of San Beda College, Mendiola, but my views are mine and should not be imputed on San Beda College (Mendiola).

The averments made by Mr. Lozada before the Senate Joint Committee conducting an investigation into what has become known as the “ZTE Scam” are serious. They suggest corruption and criminality in high places. I therefore join the demand for a thorough and expeditious investigation of the case so that those in whom criminal or administrative liability is found may be dealt with as the law ordains, and those against whom no fault can be established may be cleared of all aspersions of doubt and infamy.

While Congress, according to the Supreme Court’s reading of the constitutional allocation of powers, has the task of oversight, it clearly does not have the power to prosecute. It stands to reason therefore that if what we wish – and that is what I ardently wish – is that the guilty be brought to justice, then the bodies that are vested by law with prosecutorial power, such as the Office of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice, should with due enthusiasm, transparency, efficiency and expeditiousness investigate the case, calling on Mr. Lozada perhaps as its principal witness.

I cannot however join my voice to the calls for the President’s resignation – or perhaps, even forcible ouster from office. What has Mr. Lozada said that establishes the culpability of the President? I have followed the proceedings unfold before the nation through national television. I have listened intently to his testimony in answer to the questions asked, many of the latter rambling and incoherent! I have listened to Senators Defensor-Santiago, Arroyo and Enrile test the credibility of the witness. They showed themselves to be true lawyers. They had the right to ask the questions they did. I fail to see the connection between Mr. Lozada’s statements and what I consider precipitous calls for the President’s resignation.

Public and political will-formation takes place through discourse, the assumption being that people are willing to be persuaded by the force of the better argument. I hope that this is true of us all, including those now massed at Makati. Evicting an elective official from office – particularly the President – circumvents the demands of rational discourse. It is pure and simple strategic action. I opt for rational discourse. We should be mature; we can be mature!

I am appalled at the way Neri was badgered by one who held himself out as an advocate of truth. I applaud Neri for his calm and for his courtesy. He showed himself a true gentleman, and conducted himself in a scholarly manner. The person who forced him to “tell the truth now” never said by what right or title of office he demanded of Chairman Neri the truth.

We are capable of mature and rational conduct. In this respect, I have not lost faith.

FR. RANHILIO CALLANGAN AQUINO
Dean, Graduate School of Law

Is Lozada a credible witness?

Everybody and his mother's eyes are riveted to the ongoing NBN probe at the Senate. Here at last, they think, is THE witness who will finally bring a "corrupt" administration down. In my book, however, Lozada is simply another overhyped witness, in the same league as Sandra Cam, et al. When not giving way to his leaky waterworks, Lozada is cocky and arrogant. But those aren't his only sins.

Lozada alleges that he was kidnapped by agents of the administration. He says that he was grabbed at the airport where he was supposed to meet the arresting agents of the Senate sergeant-at-arms, then driven around, and that his captors refused to tell him where they were going. He says that he was not acting of his own freewill when he went with them.

However, the whole time that Lozada was being driven around, he was allowed the free use of his cellphone. He was even able to contact his family and make it appear that he had been kidnapped. He was able to eat at an expensive restaurant; and finally, he was brought to the La Salle brothers, where he admittedly wanted to go.

In her article Whistleblower's own sins, Belinda Olivares-Cunanan surmised that Lozada could have been manipulated by opposition Senator Lacson's group to testify against the administration. Firstly, she pointed out DENR Secretary Lito Atienza's testimony that Lozada had requested his help to secure protection against unnamed threats. He says that Lozada seemed very afraid. He further pointed out how he felt betrayed when it turned out that Lozada was already in touch with Lacson since December, something that Lacson himself admitted.

Secondly, Lozada admitted to Senator Miriam Santiago that he had committed serious irregularities (involving millions of pesos) during his tenure as president of Philippine Forest Corporation. Cunanan says of the issue:

[Lozada] readily admitted to Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago that Philippine Forest Corp. had taken out a P5-million insurance policy with Insular Life with his wife acting as the agent and that it had leased out a 50-hectare property in Antipolo City to a company that he personally controlled.

In addition, Santiago rattled off a number of contracts entered into by Gabriel Multimedia Services, which is owned by Lozada’s brother and which did not go through a proper bidding. She also questioned Lozada’s purchase of expensive vehicles that the whistleblower insisted were for PhilForest’s use.

* * *

Lozada, when confronted by Santiago, aside from admitting to the narration of irregularities, ascribed them to his personal “permissible zone” and how the senator had just blown that zone away. In other forums, Lozada said that considering that he has attacked a project involving billions of pesos, his own personal indiscretions were peanuts.

That is bothersome; comparing the billions of pesos in the ZTE project with the millions of pesos involved in his personal projects is indeed like comparing oranges and apples. But the fact is that in his area of jurisdiction, the irregularities were very serious and he can be charged with graft for them, and yet he pooh-poohs them. Does his record make him a credible witness in a grand corruption issue? What’s even more alarming is that the religious groups backing him up play blind to this double standard. No wonder people are so confused.

On the account alone of Lozada's personal corruption, anyone in his sane mind would think twice about his credibility as a witness. Perhaps some would point out that the same is also true of Chavit Singson. Hardly. Chavit had, not only his personal knowledge, but also documentary evidence--the paper trail--to implicate Erap in his allegations that the latter profited from jueteng. Unlike Chavit, Lozada has neither documentary evidence, nor does he even have personal knowledge of Mike Arroyo's involvement in the alleged anomaly. That was why Senators Santiago, Enrile, Arroyo and Gordon placed such emphasis on his credibility, or lack of it. That was the only thing he was standing on, in the absence of hard evidence. I repeat, WAS.

The litany of Lozada's corruption gives further credence to the story of the executive officials who contradicted his claims that he was kidnapped. No wonder he would be hesitant to testify or to even tell Atienza what those 'unnamed threats' were. No wonder his wife was shedding those crocodile tears to the media. She herself was involved in her husband's anomalies, notably the P5-million insurance anomaly where she acted as the agent.

Lozada has the gall to smirk at the Senate probe as if he were lily-white. Thanks to Senator Santiago, his own anomalies are now public knowledge. In the absence of concrete evidence, this guy is just another in a long line of clowns courtesy of the circus that is the Senate.

A Taste Of Their Own Medicine

The Chinese-Filipino community in the Philippines is in an uproar over the supposed racist comments made by Chief Presidential Legal Adviser Sergio Apostol in a media interview on Friday. The Palace official was apparently lambasting Rodolfo "Jun" Lozada Jr., who testified in the ongoing Senate inquiry into the alleged overpricing of the NBN-ZTE broadband project. Apostol's comment is quoted below from an ABS-CBN news article.

"He is a crying witness like a crying lady. Di ba sabi niya 'probinsyanong Intsik'? Intsik pala siya eh. Kung ako ipapa-deport ko na 'yan. Magulo ka dito."

Now, I don't know about you, but it seems to me that the statement has been taken out of context. In my own understanding, Apostol was merely referring to those foreigners who are "troublemakers". In whatever country you may be, if you have violated its laws or are otherwise deemed to be an undesirable alien, you will be deported.

On the other hand, I find it hypocritical of Chinese-Filipinos to be falling all over themselves denouncing this statement as racist. The Chinese-Filipino community in the Philippines is known to be clannish and to look down on non-Chinese Filipino ethnic groups as somehow belonging to a lower social order. It is a known practice of Chinese families to cast off their children who choose to marry non-Chinese Filipinos, or otherwise snub non-Chinese spouses. The racist attitude of the Chinese community towards non-Chinese in the Philippines has been going on since time immemorial of Chinese immigration until the present, and happens in many aspects of Chinese interaction with non-Chinese Filipinos.

Have these self-righteous Chinese-Filipino groups done anything about this? I would really like to see the likes of Teresita Ang See extend their efforts to breaking down the tradition of snotty exclusivity in the Chinese-Filipino community, and not simply confine those efforts to resisting discrimination against Chinese-Filipinos. Then only can they take the moral high ground in condemning acts violative of the rights of citizens "regardless of ethnic origins".

Moreover, Apostol's critics are overlooking the fact that it was Lozada himself who referred to himself as a "probinsyanong Intsik". By doing so, Lozada was effectively distinguishing himself from Filipinos of other ethnic orgins, or "ordinary Filipinos", something that Apostol merely reacted to. Perhaps it is because this is a common attitude among Chinese-Filipinos that they saw nothing wrong with it, and instead took exception to Apostol's reaction.

This camera-shy little bundle of joy arrived last December and promptly snuggled close in my arms. Nero, after whom this blog is named, was born October 19, 2007. He is now almost four months old, somewhat unruly, but already understands simple commands like "come here," "lie down," and "no." He likes home-cooked meals, long walks and back rubs.



Nero in the garden. We had much ado trying to make him stay still.