Recognizing and Conquering the Real Enemy in ‘In the Eyes of the People’
Recognizing and Conquering the Real Enemy in ‘In the Eyes of the People’
Today marks this year’s midterm elections, bringing with it the usual barrage of visual and auditory distractions: billboards and jingles from just about every politician, most of whom you only hear from during campaign season and never again. Alongside the growing number of convicted criminals running for the Senate, this period also sees the incumbent and opposition camps battling it out in local elections across every province, with mayors doing everything they can—through false promises and devious tactics—to prove themselves worthy of the position.
It’s no coincidence then that the weeks leading up to the elections have seen a surge in theater productions highlighting the significance of voting: The Necessary Theatre’s Via Dolorosa, with its exploration of rising extremism in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict caused by a certain figurehead; Ateneo Entablado’s twinbill Personalitika, confronting the elephant in the room that is the constant glamorization of dodgy politicians; and Company of Actors and Streamlined Theatre (CAST) PH and Mad Child Productions’ collaboration, In The Eyes of the People, depicting the conflict that inevitably creeps into a politician’s own family.
Freely adapted from An Enemy of the People by Henrik Ibsen, In the Eyes of the People intricately follows the Lopez family, led by Santa Cristina’s mayoral patriarch, Peter Lopez (Ron Capinding). When he hires his sister Tricia (Jenny Jamora) to oversee the scientific side of his ambitious hot springs project, tensions in the family gradually simmer until it reaches a boiling point after the discovery of an unknown bacteria, a fortnight before the grand opening. The heat further intensifies when Tricia’s daughter Pauline (Jam Binay), a young journalist, leaks the brewing PR disaster—compromising her boss Enzo’s (Zoë de Ocampo) position and her father Alvin’s (Nor Domingo) company in the fallout. A two-and-a-half hour dramedy unfolds as the personal and professional blur and the system—although challenged—remains unchanged.
Having been familiar with the play’s source material and its 2024 Broadway adaptation, it’s worth pointing out the efforts to localize this 19th-century Norwegian drama to resonate more for the Filipino audiences: the rearrangement of familial ties among the characters to both challenge and emphasize our deeply rooted family-oriented culture; the intentional leak of an unverified report and the ensuing backlash toward the whistleblower reflecting our obsession with sensationalism; and the insertion of a so-called “debate” and the effect that social media has in rewarding emotion over facts. In essence, the play acts as a mirror, reflecting both the highs and lows of contemporary society compared to how it was 143 years ago. Though I do wonder if director-playwright Nelsito Gomez, like Ibsen, also had an uncle who inspired his version of Peter. Regardless, it’s a commendable adaptation that left audiences like me on a rollercoaster of emotions throughout its runtime.
Even the slight alteration of the title raises a question which that 1883 play already established: in the eyes of the people–this time, the theatergoers–who is the real enemy? It’s easy to pin the blame on the protagonist (or should I say antagonist?), Peter Lopez, the focal figure who refuses to suspend a potentially dangerous project for the sake of his image in the upcoming elections. But the world is rarely black and white, and some of his points do hold weight–especially when viewed from a position of his authority. The cost of repair, the loss of jobs and the PR nightmare isn’t just a blow to his mayoral campaign; it’s a hit to the town of Santa Cristina as a whole. After all, who would want to visit a hot spring possibly teeming with pneumonia-causing bacteria?
Perhaps Pauline is to blame for compromising her journalistic integrity and inciting city-wide panic. Or Tricia, for not being assertive enough to counter both her brother’s and her daughter’s decisions. Maybe it’s Enzo, for lacking multiple fail-safes in his publication. Or Alvin, for allowing his mining company to operate nearby using toxic chemicals, the possible catalyst for the bacterial outbreak. Each character plays a role in escalating the crisis, but what good does the blame game do beyond stirring up our emotions? What’s most concerning is how victims end up as mere unnamed statistics sidelined by the collapse of a political figurehead. I’ll admit that when I saw the staged reading at Karrivin Studios last January, I was so fixated on the sibling conflict that I forgot the name of the child who tragically died days after bathing in the springs. Her name is Sky and she should be remembered.
While the play masterfully tackles themes that have remained relevant and divisive for nearly two centuries—economic prosperity versus the environment, the personal versus the professional, and family versus constituents—I believe the most important takeaway is the value of understanding nuance. Admit it or not, we’ve all reacted emotionally to a political issue at some point. And yes it’s easy to fall back on our biases and reduce people to either “good” or “bad,” but the harder and more necessary action moving forward is to pause, fact-check, and reflect before speaking. This should also be the kind of mindset that we bring when voting for our future leaders, as we don’t live in an ideal world where every politician is good, so we must learn to make informed compromises and continue engaging in democracy by voting for those who can push meaningful change, however imperfect they may be.
In the Eyes of the People wouldn’t be as impactful without a Peter who commands the stage—and Ron Capinding does exactly that with a performance that blends menace and charm, embodying the kind of trapo politician we all imagine in our heads. In contrast, Jenny Jamora delivers Tricia with a calm and collected energy, capable of erupting with intensity when the scene demands it. Their dynamic became the heart of the play; not only sharp in comedic timing but also deeply affecting in its most emotional moments. Still, the true scene-stealer is Katski Flores as Peter’s mayoral competitor Ruby, whose monologue checks all the boxes of the ideal politician, only to reveal a twist that blindsides both the characters and the audience in the end. Despite having the least time on stage, she manages to manipulate every other character around her to her will, and to some extent even us as watchers. Not much has changed from the stage reading to the full production, aside from added stage props, more polished visual and sound effects, and a seating arrangement that cleverly mirrors a debate setup—all of which heightens the tension and immerses the audience even more.
I won’t tell you who to vote for in the midterm elections, but I will remind you to exercise your right to vote and to make informed, thoughtful choices. While the ending of the play suggests that all politicians are evil and the same, real life tells a more complex story. We should continue to strive for the better by electing those who run with genuine intentions to serve their communities and our nation, and to fight—peacefully, critically, and democratically—for our rights and freedoms.
