Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
23 September 2019 | Story Rulanzen Martin | Photo Rulanzen Martin
Opening exhibition
Some of the artworks from the UFS permanent collection was on exhibition at the Johannes Stegmann Gallery.

When you visit the permanent art collection housed at the art gallery at the Centenary Complex of the University of the Free State (UFS) you will learn something new about South African culture. The 1 200 piece collection is the UFS’s effort to preserve our cultural and historical legacy with poignant works from artist such as Jackson Hlungwane, JH Pierneef, Lucas Sithole, Irma Stern and Azaria Mbatha.

The permanent collection boasts the most diverse collection of contemporary artworks in a public space at a South African university. The artworks are often loaned to significant national and international exhibitions, creating an opportunity for research, teaching and promotion of the UFS. 

The collection has been acquired by the UFS over the past 80 years and comprises paintings, sculptural works, murals, prints, photographic and ceramic works. It includes works of art pioneers from the region and other parts of the country. “The collection hosts one of the most substantial representations of art which was created in the Free State region with works by Frans Claerhout, Pauline Gutter, George Ramagage and Motseokae Klas Thibeletsa,’’ said Angela de Jesus, UFS art curator. It also houses The Human Rights Print Portfolio’ (1996), one of South African’s most significant post-apartheid print portfolios.

Angela de Jesus, UFS art curator and Prof Suzanne Human, chairperson of the UFS Arts Advisory Committee.
 Angela de Jesus, UFS art curator and Prof Suzanne Human, chairperson of the UFS Arts Advisory Committee.
(Photo: Rulanzen Martin)


Recent exhibition showcases works of sensible agendas

Some of the artworks, acquired from 2009-2019, are also currently on exhibition at the Johannes Stegmann gallery. At the opening of the exhibition on 28 August, Prof Suzanne Human, chairperson of the UFS Arts Advisory Committee said the “exhibition does not show all the works but the cohesion between the artworks reveals there is a sensible agenda and sound acquisition criteria.”

The exhibition interrogates the complexities of the reality of a free South Africa. “The UFS collection is a university collection and the works acquired are therefore of scholarly interest. Each work in the exhibition is topical in research circles,” said Prof Human. I have not, I have by Mary Sibande

The exhibition at UFS was open until 4 October 2019

Collection preserving cultural and historic identity 

Contemporary artworks which deal with relevant sociopolitical and environmental issues include works by Kim Berman, Thembinkosi Goniwe, Sam Nhlengethwa, Pippa Skotnes and Diane Victor. 
According to De Jesus the collection “provides an irreplaceable educational reserve for understanding our unique cultural and historical identity.”

“The UFS art collection promotes the importance of visual art for research, teaching, and as a vehicle for critical dialogue. Its aim is to encourage critical thinking and to be reflective of the social, cultural and political diversity of the Free State and South Africa,” she said.

Significant art projects expanded collection’s footprint


Over the years several projects were initiated to enrich the art collection to address gaps in and around the collection to encourage social justice and critical dialogue. As part of the Lotto Sculpture-on-Campus Project (2009-2012) the UFS commissioned 16 public artworks for the Bloemfontein Campus. “Through this project the UFS established the most diverse collection of contemporary artworks in a public space at a South African university, with exceptional works by Willem Boshoff, Noria    
 Mabasa, Willie Bester, Kagiso Patrick Mautloa, Brett Murray and others.” said de Jesus. 

(Picured on the right: I Have Not, I Have by Mary Sibande)


News Archive

Stem cell research and human cloning: legal and ethical focal points
2004-07-29

   

(Summary of the inaugural lecture of Prof Hennie Oosthuizen, from the Department of Criminal and Medical Law at the Faculty of Law of the University of the Free State.)

 

In the light of stem cell research, research on embryo’s and human cloning it will be fatal for legal advisors and researchers in South Africa to ignore the benefits that new bio-medical development, through research, contain for this country.

Legal advisors across the world have various views on stem cell research and human cloning. In the USA there is no legislation that regulates stem cell research but a number of States adopted legislation that approves stem cell research. The British Parlement gave permission for research on embryonic stem cells, but determined that it must be monitored closely and the European Union is of the opinion that it will open a door for race purification and commercial exploitation of human beings.

In South Africa the Bill on National Health makes provision for therapeutical and non therapeutical research. It also makes provision for therapeutical embryonical stem cell research on fetuses, which is not older than 14 days, as well as for therapeutical cloning under certain circumstances subject to the approval of the Minister. The Bill prohibits reproductive cloning.

Research on human embrio’s is a very controversial issue, here and in the rest of the world.

Researchers believe that the use of stem cell therapy could help to side-step the rejection of newly transplanted organs and tissue and if a bank for stem cell could be built, the shortage of organs for transplants would become something of the past. Stem cells could also be used for healing of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s and spinal injuries.

Sources from which stem cells are obtained could also lead to further ethical issues. Stem cells are harvested from mature human cells and embryonic stem cells. Another source to be utilised is to take egg cells from the ovaries of aborted fetuses. This will be morally unacceptable for those against abortions. Linking a financial incentive to that could become more of a controversial issue because the woman’s decision to abort could be influenced. The ideal would be to rather use human fetus tissue from spontaneous abortions or extra-uterine pregnancies than induced abortions.

The potential to obtain stem cells from the blood of the umbilical cord, bone-marrow and fetus tissue and for these cells to arrange themselves is known for quite some time. Blood from the umbilical cord contains many stem cells, which is the origin of the body’s immune and blood system. It is beneficial to bank the blood of a newborn baby’s umbilical cord. Through stem cell transplants the baby or another family member’s life could be saved from future illnesses such as anemia, leukemia and metabolic storing disabilities as well as certain generic immuno disabilities.

The possibility to withdraw stem cells from human embrio’s and to grow them is more useable because it has more treatment possibilities.

With the birth of Dolly the sheep, communities strongly expressed their concern about the possibility that a new cloning technique such as the replacement of the core of a cell will be used in human reproduction. Embryonic splitting and core replacement are two well known techniques that are associated with the cloning process.

I differentiate between reproductive cloning – to create a cloned human embryo with the aim to bring about a pregnancy of a child that is identical to another individual – and therapeutically cloning – to create a cloned human embryo for research purposes and for healing human illnesses.

Worldwide people are debating whether to proceed with therapeutical cloning. There are people for and against it. The biggest ethical objection against therapeutical cloning is the termination of the development of a potential human being.

Children born from cloning will differ from each other. Factors such as the uterus environment and the environment in which the child is growing up will play a role. Cloning create unique children that will grow up to be unique individuals, just like me and you that will develop into a person, just like you and me. If we understand this scientific fact, most arguments against human cloning will disappear.

Infertility can be treated through in vitro conception. This process does not work for everyone. For some cloning is a revolutionary treatment method because it is the only method that does not require patients to produce sperm and egg cells. The same arguments that were used against in vitro conception in the past are now being used against cloning. It is years later and in vitro cloning is generally applied and accepted by society. I am of the opinion that the same will happen with regard to human cloning.

There is an argument that cloning must be prohibited because it is unsafe. Distorted ideas in this regard were proven wrong. Are these distorted ideas justified to question the safety of cloning and the cloning process you may ask. The answer, according to me, is a definite no. Human cloning does have many advantages. That includes assistance with infertility, prevention of Down Syndrome and recovery from leukemia.

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept