* Linguistic diversity: The Philippines boasts a multitude of languages and dialects, each with its own rich literary tradition. A single sensibility would require unifying these diverse voices, a near-impossible task given the unique cultural expressions embedded within each language. Tagalog (Filipino), while the national language, doesn't automatically encompass the entirety of Filipino literary experience.
* Colonial influences: Centuries of Spanish and American colonization profoundly shaped Filipino literature, leaving a complex layering of influences that makes identifying a purely "national" essence challenging. The interplay of indigenous traditions, colonial styles, and subsequent modern adaptations creates a hybridity that resists easy categorization.
* Regional variations: Similar to linguistic diversity, geographical location significantly impacts literary expression. The experiences and cultural perspectives of writers from Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao differ considerably, resulting in a fragmented literary landscape. A unifying sensibility would need to reconcile these regional differences, which often represent distinct cultural identities.
* Evolving social and political contexts: The national sensibility is not static; it evolves alongside the nation's social, political, and economic landscape. What might have constituted a national sensibility in the past might not resonate with the present, making any fixed definition inherently limiting and potentially misleading.
* The problematic nature of "nationalism" itself: Tinio might also subtly question the very concept of a unified "national" sensibility. He might argue that forcing a singular identity onto such a diverse nation risks homogenizing unique voices and potentially suppressing minority perspectives. A more nuanced understanding might recognize a plurality of sensibilities existing alongside and influencing each other rather than attempting a reductive synthesis.
In essence, Tinio likely suggests that focusing on a monolithic "national literary sensibility" risks overlooking the richness and complexity of Filipino literary traditions. A more fruitful approach would involve acknowledging the diverse influences and regional variations that contribute to the vibrant tapestry of Filipino literature.